Pick Command A+ for cohere's newer, more efficient flagship - runs on just two h100 gpus, unusually lean for a 218b-parameter model or a 218b-total/25b-active moe released with open weights (apache 2.0) on hugging face. Pick Fugu Max for cost-efficient multi-agent orchestration — undercuts claude sonnet 5 and kimi k3 on output cost by a claimed 40-60% or 1m-token context window at $2/$6 per million tokens. Choose Command A+ if you need self-hosting or data privacy; Fugu Max if you want a managed API.
Command A+ (Cohere) and Fugu Max (Sakana AI) are two of the models people most often weigh against each other in 2026. Command A+ is cohere's newer, leaner flagship - a 218B open-weight MoE tuned for efficiency (just two GPUs to run) and 48-language support. Fugu Max is sakana AI's cost-first multi-agent orchestration model — not a single trained model, but a routed pool of models behind one API, priced at $2/$6 per million tokens. They diverge most on price, context window and open vs. closed weights — each quantified below from the models' real specs.
Key differences
Cost model: Command A+ ships open weights you can self-host (hardware cost only, no per-token fee), while Fugu Max is API-metered at $2/$6 per 1M tokens. Your choice depends on whether you want zero marginal cost at the price of running infrastructure.
Context window: Fugu Max holds 3.9× more — 1M tokens (~1,500 pages) vs 256K (unconfirmed) (~384 pages). But effective recall usually fades long before the advertised ceiling, so the bigger number only helps if the model reasons over it.
Recency: Fugu Max is the newer model by about 4 months (released September 10, 2026), usually meaning fresher training data and capabilities.
Specifications
Spec
Command A+
Fugu Max
Provider
Cohere (Canada)
Sakana AI (Global)
Released
May 19, 2026
September 10, 2026
Context window
256K (unconfirmed) (~384 pages)
1M tokens (~1,500 pages)
Price (in/out)
Open weight (self-host / free)
$2/$6 per 1M tokens
Open weight?
Yes — self-hostable
No — API only
Modalities
text, code
text
SWE-Bench Verified
Not published
Not published
MRCR v2 @ 1M
Not published
Not published
Who wins what
Cohere's newer, more efficient flagship - runs on just two H100 GPUs, unusually lean for a 218B-parameter model: Command A+ — Fugu Max is comparatively weak here — not a single trained model — Sakana describes Fugu as "a Multi-Agent System, Delivered as One Model" that routes tasks across a pool of other models, so raw benchmark comparisons to monolithic models can be misleading
A 218B-total/25B-active MoE released with open weights (Apache 2.0) on Hugging Face: Command A+ — Open weights make this possible at all — Fugu Max is API-only, so it cannot leave the vendor's servers.
Supports 48 languages, including all official EU languages: Command A+ — Cohere's newer, leaner flagship - a 218B open-weight MoE tuned for efficiency (just two GPUs to run) and 48-language support — and its weights are open while Fugu Max is API-only.
Cost-efficient multi-agent orchestration — undercuts Claude Sonnet 5 and Kimi K3 on output cost by a claimed 40-60%: Fugu Max — Command A+ is comparatively weak here — enterprise/multilingual focus rather than topping general reasoning leaderboards
1M-token context window at $2/$6 per million tokens: Fugu Max — Its 1M tokens window holds about 3.9× more than Command A+'s 256K (unconfirmed) in a single prompt.
OpenAI-compatible API — drop-in replacement for single-model integrations: Fugu Max — Sakana AI's cost-first multi-agent orchestration model — not a single trained model, but a routed pool of models behind one API, priced at $2/$6 per million tokens — and it carries the larger 1M tokens context.
Lowest cost at scale: Command A+ — Its weights are open, so at volume you pay for your own hardware instead of Fugu Max's $2/$6 per 1M tokens.
Largest single-prompt input: Fugu Max — Its 1M tokens window is about 3.9× larger than Command A+'s 256K (unconfirmed), fitting roughly 1,500 pages in one prompt.
Which should you pick?
A cost-sensitive startup shipping high volume: Command A+ — At Open weight (self-host / free) it undercuts Fugu Max, and on millions of tokens that margin decides the monthly bill.
Someone analysing very long documents or codebases: Fugu Max — Larger 1M tokens window fits more in one prompt.
A team with data-privacy or self-hosting needs: Command A+ — Open weights let you run it on your own hardware; Fugu Max is API-only.
Anyone whose priority is cohere's newer, more efficient flagship - runs on just two h100 gpus, unusually lean for a 218b-parameter model: Command A+ — It is specifically built for that.
Anyone whose priority is cost-efficient multi-agent orchestration — undercuts claude sonnet 5 and kimi k3 on output cost by a claimed 40-60%: Fugu Max — That is its strongest area.
Command A+: where it fits
Cohere's newer, leaner flagship - a 218B open-weight MoE tuned for efficiency (just two GPUs to run) and 48-language support. Released May 19, 2026 by Cohere, it is built for cohere's newer, more efficient flagship - runs on just two H100 GPUs, unusually lean for a 218B-parameter model, a 218B-total/25B-active MoE released with open weights (Apache 2.0) on Hugging Face, supports 48 languages, including all official EU languages, and positioned by Cohere as its 'most efficient and performant model to date'.
Its trade-offs are real: no official context window or per-token price published yet - both are estimated/unavailable, newer release with less independent benchmark verification than established flagships, and enterprise/multilingual focus rather than topping general reasoning leaderboards. As an open-weight model, its running cost is your own hardware rather than a per-token fee.
Fugu Max: where it fits
Sakana AI's cost-first multi-agent orchestration model — not a single trained model, but a routed pool of models behind one API, priced at $2/$6 per million tokens. Released September 10, 2026 by Sakana AI, it is built for cost-efficient multi-agent orchestration — undercuts Claude Sonnet 5 and Kimi K3 on output cost by a claimed 40-60%, 1M-token context window at $2/$6 per million tokens, and openAI-compatible API — drop-in replacement for single-model integrations.
Its trade-offs: not a single trained model — Sakana describes Fugu as "a Multi-Agent System, Delivered as One Model" that routes tasks across a pool of other models, so raw benchmark comparisons to monolithic models can be misleading, the cheaper sibling to Fugu Ultra v2 — lower ceiling on the hardest reasoning tasks, and a young, first-generation product from Sakana AI's orchestration approach, unproven at scale versus established frontier labs. At $2 in / $6 out per million tokens, it sits in the mid price band.
The bottom line for this matchup
The defining split here is open vs. closed. Command A+ gives you weights you control — self-host it, fine-tune it, keep data in-house, pay only for hardware. Fugu Max gives you a managed, always-updated API with no infrastructure to run. Teams with GPUs, privacy requirements, or huge volume often favour the open model; teams that want zero ops and the latest capabilities favour the closed one. Capability is close enough that this operational question, not the benchmark, usually decides it.
Frequently asked questions
Is Command A+ or Fugu Max better for coding?
Public SWE-Bench figures are not available for either model, so the honest test is your own repository — run an identical real bug through both. By design, Command A+ leans toward cohere's newer, more efficient flagship - runs on just two h100 gpus, unusually lean for a 218b-parameter model while Fugu Max leans toward cost-efficient multi-agent orchestration — undercuts claude sonnet 5 and kimi k3 on output cost by a claimed 40-60%, and that positioning usually predicts which feels better on your codebase.
Which is cheaper, Command A+ or Fugu Max?
Command A+ is open-weight, so self-hosting means no per-token fee (you pay for hardware instead), while Fugu Max is API-metered at $2/$6 per 1M tokens. For most teams without GPUs, the API model is cheaper to start; at very high volume, self-hosting can win.
Which has the bigger context window?
Fugu Max — 1M tokens vs 256K (unconfirmed), about 3.9× larger. Useful only if the model actually reasons over the full window, which not all do.
Can I use both Command A+ and Fugu Max together?
Yes — a multi-model platform like LumiChats gives you Command A+, Fugu Max and 40+ others under one ₹69/day pass (about $1/day), so you can draft with one and cross-check with the other instead of buying two subscriptions.
Which is newer, Command A+ or Fugu Max?
Fugu Max — released September 10, 2026, about 4 months after Command A+.
Command A+ vs Fugu Max
Cohere · Canada | Sakana AI · Global · Updated June 2026
Quick verdict
Pick Command A+ for cohere's newer, more efficient flagship - runs on just two h100 gpus, unusually lean for a 218b-parameter model or a 218b-total/25b-active moe released with open weights (apache 2.0) on hugging face. Pick Fugu Max for cost-efficient multi-agent orchestration — undercuts claude sonnet 5 and kimi k3 on output cost by a claimed 40-60% or 1m-token context window at $2/$6 per million tokens. Choose Command A+ if you need self-hosting or data privacy; Fugu Max if you want a managed API.
Command A+ (Cohere) and Fugu Max (Sakana AI) are two of the models people most often weigh against each other in 2026. Command A+ is cohere's newer, leaner flagship - a 218B open-weight MoE tuned for efficiency (just two GPUs to run) and 48-language support. Fugu Max is sakana AI's cost-first multi-agent orchestration model — not a single trained model, but a routed pool of models behind one API, priced at $2/$6 per million tokens. They diverge most on price, context window and open vs. closed weights — each quantified below from the models' real specs.
Key differences at a glance
▸Cost model: Command A+ ships open weights you can self-host (hardware cost only, no per-token fee), while Fugu Max is API-metered at $2/$6 per 1M tokens. Your choice depends on whether you want zero marginal cost at the price of running infrastructure.
▸Context window: Fugu Max holds 3.9× more — 1M tokens (~1,500 pages) vs 256K (unconfirmed) (~384 pages). But effective recall usually fades long before the advertised ceiling, so the bigger number only helps if the model reasons over it.
▸Recency: Fugu Max is the newer model by about 4 months (released September 10, 2026), usually meaning fresher training data and capabilities.
Side-by-side specs
Spec
Command A+
Fugu Max
Provider
Cohere (Canada)
Sakana AI (Global)
Released
May 19, 2026
September 10, 2026
Context window
256K (unconfirmed) (~384 pages)
1M tokens (~1,500 pages)
Price (in/out)
Open weight (self-host / free)
$2/$6 per 1M tokens
Open weight?
Yes — self-hostable
No — API only
Modalities
text, code
text
SWE-Bench Verified
Not published
Not published
MRCR v2 @ 1M
Not published
Not published
Who wins what
Cohere's newer, more efficient flagship - runs on just two H100 GPUs, unusually lean for a 218B-parameter model
Command A+
Fugu Max is comparatively weak here — not a single trained model — Sakana describes Fugu as "a Multi-Agent System, Delivered as One Model" that routes tasks across a pool of other models, so raw benchmark comparisons to monolithic models can be misleading
A 218B-total/25B-active MoE released with open weights (Apache 2.0) on Hugging Face
Command A+
Open weights make this possible at all — Fugu Max is API-only, so it cannot leave the vendor's servers.
Supports 48 languages, including all official EU languages
Command A+
Cohere's newer, leaner flagship - a 218B open-weight MoE tuned for efficiency (just two GPUs to run) and 48-language support — and its weights are open while Fugu Max is API-only.
Cost-efficient multi-agent orchestration — undercuts Claude Sonnet 5 and Kimi K3 on output cost by a claimed 40-60%
Fugu Max
Command A+ is comparatively weak here — enterprise/multilingual focus rather than topping general reasoning leaderboards
1M-token context window at $2/$6 per million tokens
Fugu Max
Its 1M tokens window holds about 3.9× more than Command A+'s 256K (unconfirmed) in a single prompt.
OpenAI-compatible API — drop-in replacement for single-model integrations
Fugu Max
Sakana AI's cost-first multi-agent orchestration model — not a single trained model, but a routed pool of models behind one API, priced at $2/$6 per million tokens — and it carries the larger 1M tokens context.
Lowest cost at scale
Command A+
Its weights are open, so at volume you pay for your own hardware instead of Fugu Max's $2/$6 per 1M tokens.
Largest single-prompt input
Fugu Max
Its 1M tokens window is about 3.9× larger than Command A+'s 256K (unconfirmed), fitting roughly 1,500 pages in one prompt.
Which should you pick?
A cost-sensitive startup shipping high volume
→ Command A+
At Open weight (self-host / free) it undercuts Fugu Max, and on millions of tokens that margin decides the monthly bill.
Someone analysing very long documents or codebases
→ Fugu Max
Larger 1M tokens window fits more in one prompt.
A team with data-privacy or self-hosting needs
→ Command A+
Open weights let you run it on your own hardware; Fugu Max is API-only.
Anyone whose priority is cohere's newer, more efficient flagship - runs on just two h100 gpus, unusually lean for a 218b-parameter model
→ Command A+
It is specifically built for that.
Anyone whose priority is cost-efficient multi-agent orchestration — undercuts claude sonnet 5 and kimi k3 on output cost by a claimed 40-60%
→ Fugu Max
That is its strongest area.
Command A+: where it fits
Cohere's newer, leaner flagship - a 218B open-weight MoE tuned for efficiency (just two GPUs to run) and 48-language support. Released May 19, 2026 by Cohere, it is built for cohere's newer, more efficient flagship - runs on just two H100 GPUs, unusually lean for a 218B-parameter model, a 218B-total/25B-active MoE released with open weights (Apache 2.0) on Hugging Face, supports 48 languages, including all official EU languages, and positioned by Cohere as its 'most efficient and performant model to date'.
Its trade-offs are real: no official context window or per-token price published yet - both are estimated/unavailable, newer release with less independent benchmark verification than established flagships, and enterprise/multilingual focus rather than topping general reasoning leaderboards. As an open-weight model, its running cost is your own hardware rather than a per-token fee.
Fugu Max: where it fits
Sakana AI's cost-first multi-agent orchestration model — not a single trained model, but a routed pool of models behind one API, priced at $2/$6 per million tokens. Released September 10, 2026 by Sakana AI, it is built for cost-efficient multi-agent orchestration — undercuts Claude Sonnet 5 and Kimi K3 on output cost by a claimed 40-60%, 1M-token context window at $2/$6 per million tokens, and openAI-compatible API — drop-in replacement for single-model integrations.
Its trade-offs: not a single trained model — Sakana describes Fugu as "a Multi-Agent System, Delivered as One Model" that routes tasks across a pool of other models, so raw benchmark comparisons to monolithic models can be misleading, the cheaper sibling to Fugu Ultra v2 — lower ceiling on the hardest reasoning tasks, and a young, first-generation product from Sakana AI's orchestration approach, unproven at scale versus established frontier labs. At $2 in / $6 out per million tokens, it sits in the mid price band.
The bottom line for this matchup
The defining split here is open vs. closed. Command A+ gives you weights you control — self-host it, fine-tune it, keep data in-house, pay only for hardware. Fugu Max gives you a managed, always-updated API with no infrastructure to run. Teams with GPUs, privacy requirements, or huge volume often favour the open model; teams that want zero ops and the latest capabilities favour the closed one. Capability is close enough that this operational question, not the benchmark, usually decides it.
Want both Command A+ and Fugu Max without two subscriptions? LumiChats gives you these plus 40+ models under one ₹69/day pass (about $1/day) — draft with one, cross-check with the other.
Public SWE-Bench figures are not available for either model, so the honest test is your own repository — run an identical real bug through both. By design, Command A+ leans toward cohere's newer, more efficient flagship - runs on just two h100 gpus, unusually lean for a 218b-parameter model while Fugu Max leans toward cost-efficient multi-agent orchestration — undercuts claude sonnet 5 and kimi k3 on output cost by a claimed 40-60%, and that positioning usually predicts which feels better on your codebase.
Which is cheaper, Command A+ or Fugu Max?
Command A+ is open-weight, so self-hosting means no per-token fee (you pay for hardware instead), while Fugu Max is API-metered at $2/$6 per 1M tokens. For most teams without GPUs, the API model is cheaper to start; at very high volume, self-hosting can win.
Which has the bigger context window?
Fugu Max — 1M tokens vs 256K (unconfirmed), about 3.9× larger. Useful only if the model actually reasons over the full window, which not all do.
Can I use both Command A+ and Fugu Max together?
Yes — a multi-model platform like LumiChats gives you Command A+, Fugu Max and 40+ others under one ₹69/day pass (about $1/day), so you can draft with one and cross-check with the other instead of buying two subscriptions.
Which is newer, Command A+ or Fugu Max?
Fugu Max — released September 10, 2026, about 4 months after Command A+.
Specifications and benchmarks reflect publicly reported figures as of June 2026 and may change as providers release updates. Always verify on your own workload.