Llama 3.1 405B VS Command R+
The landscape of Large Language Models (LLMs) has reached a fever pitch with the release of Llama 3.1 405B, Meta's most ambitious open-source project to date. As a "goliath" in the field, it sets a new gold standard for open-weights performance. However, in the practical world of enterprise AI, it faces stiff competition from models like Cohere's Command R+, which is specifically engineered for business workflows and RAG (Retrieval-Augmented Generation).
To help you make an informed decision for your specific use case, we provide a deep-dive comparison based on the original insights from Benchmarks and specs.
1. Technical Specifications & Architecture
Understanding the "under the hood" metrics is crucial for infrastructure planning and latency expectations.
| Specification | Llama 3.1 405B | Command R+ |
|---|---|---|
| Parameters | 405 Billion | 104 Billion |
| Context Window | 128K | 128K |
| Max Output Tokens | 2K | 4K |
| Tokens Per Second | ~26 - 29.5 | ~48 |
| Knowledge Cutoff | December 2023 | ~December 2023 |
💡 Key Takeaway: While Llama 3.1 405B has nearly 4x the parameters of Command R+, Command R+ is significantly faster (48 tps) and supports double the output length, making it a strong contender for long-form content generation.
2. Performance Benchmarks
Llama 3.1 405B consistently dominates official industry benchmarks, showcasing its superior "raw intelligence."
MMLU (Undergraduate Knowledge)
Llama leads in general knowledge breadth.
HumanEval (Coding)
Llama 405B is a powerhouse for software development.
MATH (Problem Solving)
A massive gap in quantitative reasoning capabilities.
3. Practical Reasoning & Logic Tests
● Logical Switch Riddle
The Task: Identify which of three switches controls a bulb on the 3rd floor in one attempt.
Correctly identified the heat method (turning one switch on, waiting, then switching to another). This demonstrates advanced physical-world reasoning.
Failed to logically isolate the single-try constraint, leading to an incorrect process that relies on guesswork.
● Mathematical Precision (Binomial Theorem)
Task: Evaluate (102)^5 using the binomial theorem.
Llama 3.1 405B flawlessly executed the expansion $(100 + 2)^5$ and calculated the final sum: 11,040,808,032. Command R+ correctly identified the method but suffered from calculation hallucinations, resulting in a significantly wrong final answer.
4. Developer Implementation
You can test these models side-by-side using the OpenAI-compatible SDK. Here is a Python snippet to get started:
import openai client = openai.OpenAI( api_key='', base_url="https://api.aimlapi.com", ) def compare_models(prompt): models = [ "meta-llama/Meta-Llama-3.1-405B-Instruct-Turbo", "cohere/command-r-plus" ] for model in models: response = client.chat.completions.create( model=model, messages=[{"role": "user", "content": prompt}] ) print(f"--- Model: {model} ---\n{response.choices[0].message.content}\n") if name == "main": compare_models("Explain the impact of quantum computing on cryptography.")
5. Pricing Comparison (per 1k Tokens)
| Model | Input Price | Output Price |
| Llama 3.1 405B | $0.00525 | $0.00525 |
| Command R+ | $0.0025 | $0.01 |
Note: Llama 405B offers a balanced pricing model, whereas Command R+ is cheaper for input (ideal for long context RAG) but more expensive for output.
Final Verdict
Llama 3.1 405B is the undisputed champion for complex reasoning, high-stakes coding, and zero-shot accuracy. It is best suited for developers building applications that require the highest level of intelligence currently available in the open-weights ecosystem.
Command R+ remains a powerful tool for high-throughput workflows and specific RAG implementations where speed and long output capabilities outweigh the need for "genius-level" mathematical or logical precision.
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)
Q1: Is Llama 3.1 405B truly better than GPT-4o?
Benchmarks suggest Llama 3.1 405B is highly competitive with GPT-4o, often exceeding it in specific coding and math tasks, while being an open-weight model that allows for more flexible deployment.
Q2: When should I choose Command R+ over Llama 405B?
Choose Command R+ if your primary concern is inference speed (TPS) or if you need to generate long-form documents exceeding 2,000 tokens in a single response.
Q3: Do both models support multilingual tasks?
Yes, both Llama 3.1 and Command R+ are designed for multilingual support, though Llama 3.1 generally shows higher proficiency in a broader range of languages due to its larger training scale.
Q4: What is the benefit of the 128K context window?
A 128K context window allows both models to process roughly 300 pages of text in a single prompt, which is essential for analyzing large documents or maintaining long-running conversations.


Log in








