Compare / head-to-head
Claude Opus 4.6vsCommand A
Claude Opus 4.6 and Command A do not yet share a public benchmark, so quality cannot be compared apples-to-apples. Command A is 2.4x cheaper per token. Claude Opus 4.6 has the larger context window (1M tokens).
Benchmarks from cited public sources; pricing from official pages; status from official provider feeds.
Shared benchmarks
0
no overlap yet
Cheaper per token
Command A
2.4x cheaper, input + output
Larger context
Claude Opus 4.6
1M tokens
Provider uptime (30d)
100% · 100%
Anthropic · Cohere
Claude Opus 4.6
Anthropic · released 2026-02-05
textvision
Quality
Benchmark matrix
0 shared · 18 only Claude Opus 4.6 · 7 only Command A| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.6 | Command A | Δ | Edge |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Reported by both · 0 | ||||
| No public benchmark is reported for both models yet. | ||||
| Only Claude Opus 4.6 reports · 18 | ||||
| SWE-bench Verified | 80.8% ↗ | not reported | — | — |
| GPQA Diamond | 91.3% ↗ | not reported | — | — |
| AIME 2026 | 96.7% ↗matharena | not reported | — | — |
| LMArena Elo | 1497.5 ↗ | not reported | — | — |
| ARC-AGI-2 (Verified) | 68.8% ↗ | not reported | — | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 v2 (Epoch AI run) | 26.8% ↗epoch | not reported | — | — |
| FrontierMath Tiers 1-3 v2 (Epoch AI run) | 66% ↗epoch | not reported | — | — |
| MCP Atlas | 59.5% ↗ | not reported | — | — |
| MMMLU | 91.1% ↗ | not reported | — | — |
| MMMU-Pro (no tools) | 73.9% ↗ | not reported | — | — |
| MMMU-Pro (with tools) | 77.3% ↗ | not reported | — | — |
| OSWorld-Verified | 72.7% ↗ | not reported | — | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 (Epoch AI run) | 94.4% ↗epoch | not reported | — | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | 47% ↗epoch | not reported | — | — |
| SWE-bench Verified (Epoch AI run) | 78.7% ↗epoch | not reported | — | — |
| Tau2-bench Retail | 91.9% ↗ | not reported | — | — |
| Tau2-bench Telecom | 99.3% ↗ | not reported | — | — |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0 | 65.4% ↗ | not reported | — | — |
| Only Command A reports · 7 | ||||
| MMLU | not reported | 85.5% ↗ | — | — |
| MMLU-Pro | not reported | 69.6% ↗ | — | — |
| BFCL Overall | not reported | 63.8% ↗ | — | — |
| GPQA | not reported | 50.8% ↗ | — | — |
| IFEval | not reported | 90.9% ↗ | — | — |
| MBPP+ | not reported | 86.2% ↗ | — | — |
| RepoQA | not reported | 92.6% ↗ | — | — |
Scores tagged "epoch" or "matharena" are independent runs, used only where the lab has not published its own; ⚠ marks rows MathArena flags as released after the competition. Higher is better on every row. Δ is Claude Opus 4.6 minus Command A in the benchmark's own unit. "Not reported" means the lab has not published that figure; it is not a zero. ↗ opens the source.
Specs & pricing
Side by side
Official pricing pages and model cards| Spec | Claude Opus 4.6 | Command A | Edge |
|---|---|---|---|
| Context window | 1M tokens | 256K tokens | Claude Opus 4.6 |
| Max output | 128K tokens | 8K tokens | Claude Opus 4.6 |
| Input price / 1M | $5 ↗ | $2.5 ↗ | Command A |
| Output price / 1M | $25 ↗ | $10 ↗ | Command A |
| Cached input / 1M | $0.5 ↗ | — | — |
| Input + output / 1M Lower is cheaper. List prices; batch, tool and regional fees excluded. | $30 | $12.5 | Command A |
| Modalities | text · vision | text | Claude Opus 4.6 |
| Released | 2026-02-05 | 2025-03-13 | — |
| Cited benchmark scores | 19 | 7 | — |
Reliability
Provider status
Last 60 days · refreshed daily on this page · live on /statusMore matchups
Claude Opus 4.6 vs …
Models sharing the most benchmarksMore matchups
Command A vs …
Models sharing the most benchmarksBuilt by Respan
Which one wins on your data?
Public benchmarks are a starting point. Run Claude Opus 4.6 and Command A on your own prompts with Respan evals, or route to either through one gateway key with automatic failover.