Skip to content
Rival
How it worksPrivacyTerms
Explore all of Rival

Explore

  • Compare Models
  • All Models
  • Image Comparison
  • Audio Comparison
  • Image Generation
  • Best AI For...
  • Arena
  • API Pricing
  • Challenges

Discover

  • SubjectiveBench
  • Default Index
  • Research
  • Research downloads
  • Rival Kits
  • Find your AI taste
  • UI Glow-Up
  • VoiceLock
  • Cost Cutter
  • Agent skills
  • Benchmarks vs Vibes
  • Brief
  • Jailbreak
  • Model Updates
  • Provider Status
  • AI Creators

Connect

  • Methodology
  • Advertise
  • Partnerships
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms
  • RSS Feed
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. Compare
  4. /
  5. Command A+vsQwen3.8 Max
Updated Sep 2026

Command A+vsQwen3.8 Max

Command A+ is cheaper than Qwen3.8 Max at $0.3/M vs $2/M input tokens.

Command A+ and Qwen3.8 Max compared across 14 shared prompts
SpecCommand A+Qwen3.8 Max
Input price$0.3/M tokens$2/M tokens
Output price$1.5/M tokens$6/M tokens
Context window192K tokens1.0M tokens
WeightsClosedClosed
Free API (OpenRouter)NoNo
ReleasedSep 2026Aug 2026
Side by side

Same prompt, both answers

Opening lines from 6 of the 14 prompts both answered. Formatting stripped, words untouched.

Historical Counterfactual Analysis

If the transistor had been invented in 1920 instead of 1947, trace the likely technological, economic, and geopolitical implications through…

Command A+2,523 words
A 1920 Transistor: The Ripple Effects Through 1980 The Early Spark – 1920s‑30s What would change? Solid‑state amplifiers appear a quarter‑century earlier. The first practical transistor (likely a point‑contact or junction type) would be patented by the early 1930s, giving radio receivers a tiny, low‑power, reliable…
Read the full answer
Qwen3.8 Max4,497 words
A useful way to think about this is not “1980 becomes 2007.” The transistor would accelerate electronics, but every technology has bottlenecks: materials chemistry, precision manufacturing, rockets, batteries, displays, institutional capacity, and war.
Read the full answer

Advanced Longevity Plan (Biohacker)

Develop a comprehensive, cutting-edge 3-month longevity plan for a biohacker aiming to optimize longevity, physical and cognitive…

Command A+2,382 words
3‑Month Biohacker Longevity Blueprint Goal: Maximize healthy lifespan, peak physical performance, and cognitive sharpness while building measurable resilience. QUICK‑START SUMMARY (ONE‑PAGE ACTION PLAN) Week Primary Focus Key Supplements (dose & timing) Fasting/Diet Exercise Wearable/HRV Stress/Neuro Lab/Tracking 1‑4…
Read the full answer
Qwen3.8 Max3,196 words
12-Week Biohacker Longevity & Performance Protocol Goal: improve metabolic health, strength, VO₂max proxies, sleep, HRV/stress resilience, cognitive output, and longevity-related biomarkers over 3 months. Medical disclaimer: This is an aggressive self-experimentation framework, not medical advice.
Read the full answer

Ethical Dilemma with Stakeholders

You're the CEO of a pharmaceutical company. Your best-selling drug ($2B annual revenue, used by 4 million patients for chronic pain) has…

Command A+1,034 words
48-HOUR CRISIS ACTION PLAN: ETHICAL, LEGAL, AND FINANCIAL RISK MANAGEMENT HOURS 0-1: IMMEDIATE ASSESSMENT & CRISIS TEAM ACTIVATION Actions: Activate Crisis Management Team (CMT): CEO, Legal Counsel, Medical Director, Head of Regulatory Affairs, Head of PR, CFO, Head of HR Secure all data related to liver failure cases…
Read the full answer
Qwen3.8 Max170 words
My decision as CEO I would not wait six months. I would treat this as a credible, serious post-marketing safety signal requiring immediate precautionary action, urgent regulator engagement, and public disclosure before the earnings call.
Read the full answer

Debug This Architecture

Here's the architecture for a real-time collaborative document editor (like Google Docs): **System Overview:** - Frontend: React SPA with…

Command A+1,674 words
This architecture, while functional for a prototype, contains several critical architectural flaws regarding consistency, availability, and scalability. Below is a breakdown of the failure modes, race conditions, and bottlenecks, followed by proposed solutions and their trade-offs.
Read the full answer
Qwen3.8 Max5,155 words
Below is a comprehensive failure-mode review of the proposed architecture. I will group related issues where the same root cause creates multiple symptoms. The biggest problems are: Client-clock last-write-wins is not safe for collaborative editing.
Read the full answer

Simple 7-Ingredient Recipe

Create a simple recipe for a delicious dish (sweet or savory) using only 7 common pantry ingredients. Include a creative name for the dish…

Command A+267 words
Dish Name: Golden Garlic Parmesan Pasta Ingredients (7 pantry staples only) 8 oz (≈ 225 g) dry pasta (any shape you like) 3 Tbsp unsalted butter 2 cloves garlic, minced 1 Tbsp olive oil ½ tsp salt (plus extra for pasta water) ¼ tsp freshly ground black pepper ½ cup grated Parmesan cheese Instructions Boil the pasta…
Read the full answer
Qwen3.8 Max132 words
Dish Name: Golden Hour Peanut Butter Oat Clusters Ingredients (7): 1 cup rolled oats ½ cup peanut butter ⅓ cup honey ½ cup chocolate chips 1 teaspoon vanilla extract ½ teaspoon ground cinnamon ¼ teaspoon salt Instructions: Optional but recommended: Toast the oats in a dry skillet over medium heat for 3–4 minutes…
Read the full answer

Michelin Star Recipe Design

Design an innovative recipe for a multi-component dish worthy of a Michelin 3-star restaurant. The recipe should feature an unusual…

Command A+1,636 words
Dish Title – “Moonlit Tide” A five‑component, multi‑textural voyage that marries the elemental forces of fire, water, earth, air and the celestial moon. The narrative follows a solitary night on the Japanese coast where the sea’s fire (charred sea urchin) meets the moon’s silver (gold leaf), the water’s whisper…
Read the full answer
Qwen3.8 Max2,887 words
First Light Diver Scallop, Bone Marrow, Green Strawberry, and Chamomile A multi-component savory dish designed around contrast: sea sweetness, land richness, unripe-fruit acidity, and floral aromatics.
Read the full answer
Our Verdict
Qwen3.8 Max
Qwen3.8 Max
Command A+
Command A+Runner-up

Not enough votes to call it. On the specs, Qwen3.8 Max has the edge: bigger model tier, bigger context window.

Command A+ costs 4.0x less per token.

Too close to call
API pricing

Cost per 1M tokens

Command A+
Input
$0.30
6.7× cheaper
Output
$1.50
4.0× cheaper
Qwen3.8 Max
Input
$2.00
Output
$6.00

Command A+ is cheaper on both: 6.7× input, 4.0× output.

Where to run it

2 hosts

Command A+1 host
HostInOutContextUptime
Cohere$0.30 in·$1.50 out·192k·99.3% up
Qwen3.8 Max1 host
HostInOutContextUptime
Alibaba Cloud$2.00 in·$6.00 out·1M·99.9% up

Per million tokens. Prices and uptime via OpenRouter, checked 25 Sep 2026.

Research

What we learned reading every model

FAQ

Common questions

Command A+ is developed by Cohere while Qwen3.8 Max is developed by Qwen. Command A+ has a 192K token context window vs Qwen3.8 Max's 1.0M. You can compare their actual outputs across 14 challenges on Rival to see how they differ in practice.

It depends on your use case. Command A+ and Qwen3.8 Max each have strengths in different areas. Rival lets you compare their real outputs side-by-side across 14 challenges so you can judge which fits your needs best.

Command A+ costs $0.3/M input tokens and Qwen3.8 Max costs $2/M input tokens. Command A+ is $1.70/M cheaper per input. Check their side-by-side outputs on Rival to see if the price difference is justified by quality.

This page shows a side-by-side comparison of Command A+ and Qwen3.8 Max across shared challenges. You can vote on which model produced the better output in a blind duel. Browsing and voting are free. No account is needed to look; signing in only saves your votes and likes.

Keep exploring

More comparisons

Against the newest arrivals

Command A+ logoSolar Mini 4 logo
Command A+ vs Solar Mini 4Landed Sep 2026
Qwen3.8 Max logoQwen3.8 Max Prime logo
Qwen3.8 Max vs Qwen3.8 Max PrimeLanded Sep 2026
Command A+ logoGLM 5.3 Prime logo
Command A+ vs GLM 5.3 PrimeLanded Sep 2026
Qwen3.8 Max logoQwen3.8 Omni Flash logo
Qwen3.8 Max vs Qwen3.8 Omni FlashLanded Sep 2026
Command A+ logoClaude Opus 5.5 logo
Command A+ vs Claude Opus 5.5Landed Sep 2026
Qwen3.8 Max logoGPT-6 Luna Pro logo
Qwen3.8 Max vs GPT-6 Luna ProLanded Sep 2026
Command A+ logoGPT-6 Sol Pro logo
Command A+ vs GPT-6 Sol ProLanded Sep 2026
Qwen3.8 Max logoGPT-6 Luna logo
Qwen3.8 Max vs GPT-6 LunaLanded Sep 2026

Same lab, same size, long tail

Command A+ logoNorth Mini Code logo
Command A+ vs North Mini CodeSame lab
Command A+ logoOx Alpha logo
Command A+ vs Ox AlphaSame size
Qwen3.8 Max logoQwen3.7 Flash logo
Qwen3.8 Max vs Qwen3.7 FlashSame lab
Qwen3.8 Max logoQwen3.8 Flash logo
Qwen3.8 Max vs Qwen3.8 FlashSame lab
Command A+ logoGPT-5 logo
Command A+ vs GPT-5New provider
Command A+ logoGPT-5 Codex logo
Command A+ vs GPT-5 CodexNew provider
Command A+ logoGPT-5 Mini logo
Command A+ vs GPT-5 MiniNew provider
Command A+ logoGPT-5 Nano logo
Command A+ vs GPT-5 NanoNew provider

Model pages

Command A+ logo
Command A+17 outputs, specs and price
Qwen3.8 Max logo
Qwen3.8 Max22 outputs, specs and price
Rival
How it worksPrivacyTerms
Explore all of Rival

Explore

  • Compare Models
  • All Models
  • Image Comparison
  • Audio Comparison
  • Image Generation
  • Best AI For...
  • Arena
  • API Pricing
  • Challenges

Discover

  • SubjectiveBench
  • Default Index
  • Research
  • Research downloads
  • Rival Kits
  • Find your AI taste
  • UI Glow-Up
  • VoiceLock
  • Cost Cutter
  • Agent skills
  • Benchmarks vs Vibes
  • Brief
  • Jailbreak
  • Model Updates
  • Provider Status
  • AI Creators

Connect

  • Methodology
  • Advertise
  • Partnerships
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms
  • RSS Feed