Command A vs GLM 5.1
Cohere · Global | Z.ai · China · Updated June 2026
Quick verdict
Pick Command A for enterprise rag and retrieval or strong long-context retrieval accuracy. 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, GLM 5.1 is the value pick.
Command A (Cohere) and GLM 5.1 (Z.ai) are two of the models people most often weigh against each other in 2026. Command A is cohere's enterprise-focused model built for retrieval-augmented and grounded workloads. 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
- ▸Price: GLM 5.1 is about 1.8× cheaper on input ($1.4/$4.4 per 1M tokens vs $2.5/$10 per 1M tokens) — modest, but it adds up at steady volume.
- ▸Context window: Command A holds 1.3× more — 256K (~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: GLM 5.1 is the newer model by about 13 months (released April 7, 2026), usually meaning fresher training data and capabilities.
Side-by-side specs
| Spec | Command A | GLM 5.1 |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Cohere (Global) | Z.ai (China) |
| Released | March 2025 | April 7, 2026 |
| Context window | 256K (~384 pages) | 200K (~300 pages) |
| Price (in/out) | $2.5/$10 per 1M tokens | $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
Enterprise RAG and retrieval
Command A
Cohere's enterprise-focused model built for retrieval-augmented and grounded workloads — and it carries the larger 256K context.
Strong long-context retrieval accuracy
Command A
Its 256K window holds about 1.3× more than GLM 5.1's 200K in a single prompt.
Multilingual
Command A
Command A lists multilingual among its strengths; GLM 5.1 does not.
Long-horizon autonomous agentic engineering (up to 8-hour runs)
GLM 5.1
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 — and it runs cheaper at $1.4/$4.4 per 1M tokens.
State-of-the-art open-weight coding (topped SWE-Bench Pro at launch)
GLM 5.1
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 — and it is the newer of the two.
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
GLM 5.1
At $1.4/$4.4 per 1M tokens, it is the cheaper of the two — the gap dominates the bill on high-volume workloads.
Largest single-prompt input
Command A
Its 256K 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
→ GLM 5.1
At $1.4/$4.4 per 1M tokens it undercuts Command A, and on millions of tokens that margin decides the monthly bill.
Someone analysing very long documents or codebases
→ Command A
Larger 256K window fits more in one prompt.
Anyone whose priority is enterprise rag and retrieval
→ 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.
Command A: where it fits
Cohere's enterprise-focused model built for retrieval-augmented and grounded workloads. Released March 2025 by Cohere, it is built for enterprise RAG and retrieval, strong long-context retrieval accuracy, multilingual, and tool use.
Its trade-offs are real: less consumer presence, and narrower modality support. At $2.5 in / $10 out per million tokens, it sits in the mid price band.
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
Command A and GLM 5.1 overlap enough that the right pick depends on your specific job. GLM 5.1 costs less per token; Command A holds the larger context; and each leads in its own area — Command A for enterprise rag and retrieval, GLM 5.1 for long-horizon autonomous agentic engineering (up to 8-hour runs). Rather than crowning one, run the same hard task through both once and let the results decide.
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.
See pricingFrequently 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 enterprise rag and retrieval 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?
GLM 5.1 is cheaper — $2.5/$10 per 1M tokens vs $1.4/$4.4 per 1M tokens, roughly 1.8× apart on input.
Which has the bigger context window?
Command A — 256K 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?
GLM 5.1 — released April 7, 2026, about 13 months after Command A.
Related comparisons
Specifications and benchmarks reflect publicly reported figures as of June 2026 and may change as providers release updates. Always verify on your own workload.