CompareLLM
CompareLLM.ai
Live
LeaderboardModelsCompareStacksBest ofGuidesNewsMethod
…
CompareLLM
CompareLLM.ai
Precision Benchmarks

Programmatic, dated AI model benchmarks, head-to-head comparisons, and Stack Engine presets.

Daily ingest · 06:00 UTC

Analytics & Benchmarks

  • AI Model Leaderboard
  • Head-to-Head Compare Hub
  • Models Directory
  • Stack Engine Presets
  • Frontier Models
  • Open Weights Catalog

Guides & Intent Lists

  • Best LLM Lists (2026)
  • Best Coding LLM
  • Best Cheap LLM
  • Fastest Low-Latency LLM
  • Claude vs GPT Benchmark
  • What is Elo?
  • Methodology Guides
  • News & Dispatches

Transparency & API

  • Evaluation Methodology
  • Benchmark Changelog
  • Public JSON API
  • llms.txt Specification
  • Privacy Policy
  • Sign In / Account

© 2026 CompareLLM. Public benchmark data aggregated from Arena Elo, LiveBench, SWE-bench & OpenRouter.

Every score has a dated snapshot.

  1. Home
  2. Comparisons
  3. Claude Opus 4.5 vs Command A

Pairwise benchmark snapshot · Aug 16, 2026

Claude Opus 4.5 vs Command A benchmark

This page compares Claude Opus 4.5 (Anthropic) and Command A (Cohere) using the latest snapshots we have as of Aug 16, 2026. On preference Elo, Claude Opus 4.5 is ahead by 224 points (1,568 vs 1,344; seed-bootstrap (Aug 1, 2026)). On SWE-bench coding, Claude Opus 4.5 resolves 76.8% versus 42.6% (seed-bootstrap (Aug 1, 2026)). Command A streams faster (118 tok/s) while Command A is the cheaper output token ($10/1M). Command A has the larger context window (256k tokens). Every cell below is a dated snapshot from a named public source — we do not invent missing scores, and we do not run SWE-bench ourselves.

Quick answer

Claude Opus 4.5 vs Command A is a dated snapshot, not a lab score. Claude Opus 4.5 leads preference Elo (1,568 vs 1,344). Claude Opus 4.5 leads SWE-bench coding. Command A is the cheaper output token. Elo is crowd preference, not an exam. Pick the column that matches the job.
Share Analysis:
WhatsAppTelegramX / PostLinkedInReddit

Anthropic

Claude Opus 4.5

Anthropic frontier coding and computer-use model. SWE-bench leader on the official mini-SWE-agent harness in the Feb 2026 refresh.

Elo 1,568$25/1M out

Cohere

Command A

Cohere enterprise RAG and tool-use model.

Elo 1,344$10/1M out

Swap or Add Any Model to this Matchup

Instant pairwise benchmark recalculation across 400+ LLMs

Model A
Model B
Quick vs:vs Claude Opus 4.6vs Claude Sonnet 4.5vs Claude 3.7 Sonnetvs GPT-5

Interactive Comparison Diagram

Matchup Breakdown

Tug-of-War Matchup Matrix

Category wins across intelligence, speed, and pricing efficiency.

Claude Opus 4.5 (5)vsCommand A (5)
Claude Opus 4.5: 5W (50%)Overall: Even matchupCommand A: 5W (50%)
← Claude Opus 4.5Command A →
Claude Opus 4.5 (5/5)

Intelligence & Reasoning

Preference Elo, Coding proficiency, SWE-bench & LiveBench accuracy

Preference Elo
1,568vs1,344
Coding Elo
1,574vs—
SWE-bench
76.8%vs42.6%
LiveBench
71.2%vs56.2%
GPQA Diamond
84.1%vs66%
Claude Opus 4.5: 5WCommand A: 0W
Command A (2/2)

Speed & Latency

Generation throughput and time to first token responsiveness

Output speed
62 tok/svs118 tok/s
Time to first token
380 msvs175 ms
Claude Opus 4.5: 0WCommand A: 2W
Command A (3/3)

Pricing & Capacity

Cost per million tokens and max context window length

Output price
$25/1Mvs$10/1M
Input price
$5/1Mvs$2.5/1M
Context window
200kvs256k
Claude Opus 4.5: 0WCommand A: 3W
Capability Matchup Radar

Multi-Dimensional Capability Radar

Each spoke is a skill. Farther from the center is better (0–100th percentile). Tap any dot to inspect details.

Tap any node to inspect
Percentile 0–100
Dimensional AdvantageEven 3–3
Preference Elo

Claude Opus 4.5

224 pts advantage

Throughput Speed

Command A

56 tok/s faster

Price Efficiency

Command A

$15.00/1M cheaper

Full Benchmark Score Matrix

—
Elo
High is better
+17%1,568
EloHigh is better
1,344
Code Elo
High is better
1,574
Code EloHigh is better
—
LiveBench
High is better
+27%71.2%
LiveBenchHigh is better
56.2%
SWE-bench
High is better
+80%76.8%
SWE-benchHigh is better
42.6%
GPQA
High is better
+27%84.1%
GPQAHigh is better
66%
TTFT
Low is better
380 ms
TTFTLow is better
175 ms+117%
Speed
High is better
62 tok/s
SpeedHigh is better
118 tok/s+90%
In $
Low is better
$5/1M
In $Low is better
$2.5/1M+100%
Out $
Low is better
$25/1M
Out $Low is better
$10/1M+150%
Context
High is better
200k
ContextHigh is better
256k+28%
Interactive Simulator

Workload Cost & Savings Calculator

Simulate monthly production API costs based on published $/1M tokens.

Save up to 57% with Command A
Monthly Volume50M tokens/mo
Quick Presets:
Token Ratio (In vs Out)70% In / 30% Out
RAG / Search (10% out)Coding / Chat (50% out)
Claude Opus 4.5$550.00 / mo
In: $175.00Out: $375.00
Command A$237.50 / mo
In: $87.50Out: $150.00
Estimated Cost Delta

Command A is estimated to save $312.50/month ($3,750/year).

Based on 50M tokens (30% gen)

Key Selection Recommendations

  • 1
    Claude Opus 4.5:Pick Claude Opus 4.5 when repo-level coding accuracy is the constraint.
  • 2
    Command A:Pick Command A when you are optimizing output cost.
  • 3
    Command A:Pick Command A when time-to-first-token matters more than peak Elo.

Recommended Workload Routing

Repo / coding agentsClaude Opus 4.5

Higher SWE-bench (76.8%).

High-volume chatCommand A

Lower output list price ($10/1M).

Voice / low-latency UICommand A

Lower TTFT (175 ms).

Long-document RAGCommand A

Larger window (256k).

Screenshots / visionClaude Opus 4.5

Claude Opus 4.5 is the side marked multimodal in the catalog.

Target WorkloadRecommended PickEvaluation Rationale
Repo / coding agentsClaude Opus 4.5Higher SWE-bench (76.8%).
High-volume chatCommand ALower output list price ($10/1M).
Voice / low-latency UICommand ALower TTFT (175 ms).
Long-document RAGCommand ALarger window (256k).
Screenshots / visionClaude Opus 4.5Claude Opus 4.5 is the side marked multimodal in the catalog.

Related Editorial Dispatches & Benchmark Notes

View all news
launchFeb 20, 2026

Claude Opus 4.5 and the Feb 2026 SWE-bench row we still cite

The Feb refresh made 4.5 a coding reference. Newer Opus SKUs exist; this row stays as the dated harness point.

launchMar 13, 2025

Command A: Cohere’s enterprise RAG and tool-use row

Mar 2025. RAG and tools, not a frontier Elo play. Listed so “command a benchmark” has a sourced page.

Community Sentiment

Cast Your Matchup Vote

0 total votes

Community Discussions (0)

Sign in to cast your verified vote, bookmark models, and participate in benchmark discussions.Sign In to Post

No comments posted on this matchup yet. Be the first to share an evaluation note!

Share card

The real PNG is generated at /compare/claude-opus-4-5-vs-command-a/opengraph-image for crawlers.

PNG

CompareLLM Matrix

Verified head-to-head card

LIVE
VS
Anthropic

Claude Opus 4.5

Elo 1,568
LiveBench71.2%
SWE-bench76.8%
Speed62 tok/s
Output cost$25/1M
Cohere

Command A

Elo 1,344
LiveBench56.2%
SWE-bench42.6%
Speed118 tok/s
Output cost$10/1M

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is better overall, Claude Opus 4.5 or Command A?
Claude Opus 4.5 has the higher preference Elo in our latest snapshot (1,568). “Better” still depends on coding, price, and latency — see the table.
Which is better at coding, Claude Opus 4.5 or Command A?
Claude Opus 4.5 leads SWE-bench at 76.8% vs 42.6%. SWE-bench is one harness, not your repo.
Which is cheaper to run in production?
Command A output tokens are $10/1M versus $25/1M. Input prices and retry rates still move the real bill.
Which is faster, Claude Opus 4.5 or Command A?
Command A has the lower time-to-first-token (175 ms vs 380 ms). Tokens/sec is a separate column if you care about long completions.
Which has the larger context window?
Command A accepts 256k tokens versus 200k.
Can I self-host either model?
Neither model is marked open-weights here. You are comparing hosted APIs.
Are these scores from CompareLLM’s own evals?
No. V1 aggregates public leaderboards (and optional first-party latency pings). Each cell names its source and date. Read /methodology.
What does preference Elo mean on this page?
Preference Elo is a crowd vote from LMArena / Arena. People see two hidden answers and pick the one they like more. The model that wins more often gets a higher Elo. That means people preferred it — not that it passed a school test. It is not SWE-bench, not accuracy, and not a number we invent. Claude Opus 4.5 and Command A Elo cells are dated snapshots from the named source — we do not compute Arena ourselves.

Related news

  • launch · Feb 20, 2026

    Claude Opus 4.5 and the Feb 2026 SWE-bench row we still cite

  • launch · Mar 13, 2025

    Command A: Cohere’s enterprise RAG and tool-use row

Similar Head-to-Head Comparisons

All Claude Opus 4.5 matchups →|All Command A matchups →
Claude Opus 4.5 vs Claude Opus 4 (previous opus)Claude Opus 4.5 vs Claude Opus 4.6 (next opus)Claude Sonnet 5 vs Claude Opus 4.5Claude Opus 4.8 vs Claude Opus 4.5Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs Claude Opus 4.5Claude Fable 5 vs Claude Opus 4.5