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 GLM 5.1 for long-horizon autonomous agentic engineering (up to 8-hour runs) or state-of-the-art open-weight coding (topped swe-bench pro at launch). On a tight budget at scale, Command A+ is the value pick.
Command A+ (Cohere, Canada) and GLM 5.1 (Z.ai, China) line up two different AI ecosystems against each other — a comparison that is as much about cost philosophy and openness as raw capability. 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. GLM 5.1 is an open-weight (MIT) Chinese coding model built for long-horizon agentic engineering, topping SWE-Bench Pro at launch while running autonomously for up to 8 hours. They diverge most on price and context window — each quantified below from the models' real specs.
Key differences
Context window: Command A+ holds 1.3× more — 256K (unconfirmed) (~384 pages) vs 200K (~300 pages). But effective recall usually fades long before the advertised ceiling, so the bigger number only helps if the model reasons over it.
Recency: Command A+ is the newer model by about 42 days (released May 19, 2026), usually meaning fresher training data and capabilities.
Ecosystem: this is a Canada-vs-China matchup — they differ in pricing philosophy, data-residency options, and tooling ecosystems, not only benchmarks.
Specifications
Spec
Command A+
GLM 5.1
Provider
Cohere (Canada)
Z.ai (China)
Released
May 19, 2026
April 7, 2026
Context window
256K (unconfirmed) (~384 pages)
200K (~300 pages)
Price (in/out)
Open weight (self-host / free)
$1.4/$4.4 per 1M tokens
Open weight?
Yes — self-hostable
Yes — self-hostable
Modalities
text, code
text, code
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+ — GLM 5.1 is comparatively weak here — 754B-parameter MoE demands heavy GPU resources to self-host
A 218B-total/25B-active MoE released with open weights (Apache 2.0) on Hugging Face: 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 it carries the larger 256K (unconfirmed) context.
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 it is the newer of the two.
Long-horizon autonomous agentic engineering (up to 8-hour runs): GLM 5.1 — GLM 5.1 lists long-horizon autonomous agentic engineering (up to 8-hour runs) among its strengths; Command A+ does not.
State-of-the-art open-weight coding (topped SWE-Bench Pro at launch): GLM 5.1 — Command A+ is comparatively weak here — newer release with less independent benchmark verification than established flagships
Sustained tool use across thousands of calls: GLM 5.1 — GLM 5.1 lists sustained tool use across thousands of calls among its strengths; Command A+ does not.
Lowest cost at scale: Command A+ — Its weights are open, so at volume you pay for your own hardware instead of GLM 5.1's $1.4/$4.4 per 1M tokens.
Largest single-prompt input: Command A+ — Its 256K (unconfirmed) window is about 1.3× larger than GLM 5.1's 200K, fitting roughly 384 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 GLM 5.1, and on millions of tokens that margin decides the monthly bill.
Someone analysing very long documents or codebases: Command A+ — Larger 256K (unconfirmed) window fits more in one prompt.
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 long-horizon autonomous agentic engineering (up to 8-hour runs): GLM 5.1 — That is its strongest area.
An enterprise with regional data-residency rules: GLM 5.1 or Command A+ — Origin (Canada vs China) affects where data is processed and which compliance regime applies — check the provider's terms for your region.
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.
GLM 5.1: where it fits
An open-weight (MIT) Chinese coding model built for long-horizon agentic engineering, topping SWE-Bench Pro at launch while running autonomously for up to 8 hours. Released April 7, 2026 by Z.ai, it is built for long-horizon autonomous agentic engineering (up to 8-hour runs), state-of-the-art open-weight coding (topped SWE-Bench Pro at launch), sustained tool use across thousands of calls, and self-hostable under a permissive MIT license.
Its trade-offs: text-only, with no image, audio, or video input, and 754B-parameter MoE demands heavy GPU resources to self-host. At $1.4 in / $4.4 out per million tokens, it sits in the mid price band.
The bottom line for this matchup
This is less "which is smarter" and more "which ecosystem fits." Command A+ (Canada) and GLM 5.1 (China) differ on pricing philosophy, data-residency, and tooling as much as on raw scores. Command A+ is the cheaper option, which matters at volume. The pragmatic move is to run one real task through both and judge the outputs against your own constraints — including where your data is allowed to be processed.
Frequently asked questions
Is Command A+ or GLM 5.1 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 GLM 5.1 leans toward long-horizon autonomous agentic engineering (up to 8-hour runs), and that positioning usually predicts which feels better on your codebase.
Which is cheaper, Command A+ or GLM 5.1?
Command A+ is cheaper — Open weight (self-host / free) vs $1.4/$4.4 per 1M tokens.
Which has the bigger context window?
Command A+ — 256K (unconfirmed) vs 200K, about 1.3× larger. Useful only if the model actually reasons over the full window, which not all do.
Can I use both Command A+ and GLM 5.1 together?
Yes — a multi-model platform like LumiChats gives you Command A+, GLM 5.1 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 GLM 5.1?
Command A+ — released May 19, 2026, about 42 days after GLM 5.1.
Command A+ vs GLM 5.1
Cohere · Canada | Z.ai · China · 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 GLM 5.1 for long-horizon autonomous agentic engineering (up to 8-hour runs) or state-of-the-art open-weight coding (topped swe-bench pro at launch). On a tight budget at scale, Command A+ is the value pick.
Command A+ (Cohere, Canada) and GLM 5.1 (Z.ai, China) line up two different AI ecosystems against each other — a comparison that is as much about cost philosophy and openness as raw capability. 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. GLM 5.1 is an open-weight (MIT) Chinese coding model built for long-horizon agentic engineering, topping SWE-Bench Pro at launch while running autonomously for up to 8 hours. They diverge most on price and context window — each quantified below from the models' real specs.
Key differences at a glance
▸Context window: Command A+ holds 1.3× more — 256K (unconfirmed) (~384 pages) vs 200K (~300 pages). But effective recall usually fades long before the advertised ceiling, so the bigger number only helps if the model reasons over it.
▸Recency: Command A+ is the newer model by about 42 days (released May 19, 2026), usually meaning fresher training data and capabilities.
▸Ecosystem: this is a Canada-vs-China matchup — they differ in pricing philosophy, data-residency options, and tooling ecosystems, not only benchmarks.
Side-by-side specs
Spec
Command A+
GLM 5.1
Provider
Cohere (Canada)
Z.ai (China)
Released
May 19, 2026
April 7, 2026
Context window
256K (unconfirmed) (~384 pages)
200K (~300 pages)
Price (in/out)
Open weight (self-host / free)
$1.4/$4.4 per 1M tokens
Open weight?
Yes — self-hostable
Yes — self-hostable
Modalities
text, code
text, code
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+
GLM 5.1 is comparatively weak here — 754B-parameter MoE demands heavy GPU resources to self-host
A 218B-total/25B-active MoE released with open weights (Apache 2.0) on Hugging Face
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 it carries the larger 256K (unconfirmed) context.
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 it is the newer of the two.
Long-horizon autonomous agentic engineering (up to 8-hour runs)
GLM 5.1
GLM 5.1 lists long-horizon autonomous agentic engineering (up to 8-hour runs) among its strengths; Command A+ does not.
State-of-the-art open-weight coding (topped SWE-Bench Pro at launch)
GLM 5.1
Command A+ is comparatively weak here — newer release with less independent benchmark verification than established flagships
Sustained tool use across thousands of calls
GLM 5.1
GLM 5.1 lists sustained tool use across thousands of calls among its strengths; Command A+ does not.
Lowest cost at scale
Command A+
Its weights are open, so at volume you pay for your own hardware instead of GLM 5.1's $1.4/$4.4 per 1M tokens.
Largest single-prompt input
Command A+
Its 256K (unconfirmed) window is about 1.3× larger than GLM 5.1's 200K, fitting roughly 384 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 GLM 5.1, and on millions of tokens that margin decides the monthly bill.
Someone analysing very long documents or codebases
→ Command A+
Larger 256K (unconfirmed) window fits more in one prompt.
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 long-horizon autonomous agentic engineering (up to 8-hour runs)
→ GLM 5.1
That is its strongest area.
An enterprise with regional data-residency rules
→ GLM 5.1 or Command A+
Origin (Canada vs China) affects where data is processed and which compliance regime applies — check the provider's terms for your region.
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.
GLM 5.1: where it fits
An open-weight (MIT) Chinese coding model built for long-horizon agentic engineering, topping SWE-Bench Pro at launch while running autonomously for up to 8 hours. Released April 7, 2026 by Z.ai, it is built for long-horizon autonomous agentic engineering (up to 8-hour runs), state-of-the-art open-weight coding (topped SWE-Bench Pro at launch), sustained tool use across thousands of calls, and self-hostable under a permissive MIT license.
Its trade-offs: text-only, with no image, audio, or video input, and 754B-parameter MoE demands heavy GPU resources to self-host. At $1.4 in / $4.4 out per million tokens, it sits in the mid price band.
The bottom line for this matchup
This is less "which is smarter" and more "which ecosystem fits." Command A+ (Canada) and GLM 5.1 (China) differ on pricing philosophy, data-residency, and tooling as much as on raw scores. Command A+ is the cheaper option, which matters at volume. The pragmatic move is to run one real task through both and judge the outputs against your own constraints — including where your data is allowed to be processed.
Want both Command A+ and GLM 5.1 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 GLM 5.1 leans toward long-horizon autonomous agentic engineering (up to 8-hour runs), and that positioning usually predicts which feels better on your codebase.
Which is cheaper, Command A+ or GLM 5.1?
Command A+ is cheaper — Open weight (self-host / free) vs $1.4/$4.4 per 1M tokens.
Which has the bigger context window?
Command A+ — 256K (unconfirmed) vs 200K, about 1.3× larger. Useful only if the model actually reasons over the full window, which not all do.
Can I use both Command A+ and GLM 5.1 together?
Yes — a multi-model platform like LumiChats gives you Command A+, GLM 5.1 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 GLM 5.1?
Command A+ — released May 19, 2026, about 42 days after GLM 5.1.
Specifications and benchmarks reflect publicly reported figures as of June 2026 and may change as providers release updates. Always verify on your own workload.