Grok 4 Fast >128k vs Command R
Side-by-side comparison of pricing and capabilities
Input Price Comparison
| Attribute | Grok 4 Fast >128k | Command R |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | xAI | Cohere |
| Input Price | $0.4 /1M tokens | $0.5 /1M tokens |
| Output Price | $1 /1M tokens | $1.5 /1M tokens |
| Cached Input | $0.050 /1M tokens | $0.050 /1M tokens |
| Context Window | 1.0M | 128K |
| Type | chat | chat |
| Status | current | current |
Capability Comparison
| Capability | Grok 4 Fast >128k | Command R |
|---|---|---|
| coding | ||
| multilingual |
Which should you choose?
Budget-conscious: Grok 4 Fast >128k is 20% cheaper on input tokens ($0.4 vs $0.5 per 1M tokens).
Context-heavy tasks: Grok 4 Fast >128k offers a larger context window (1.0M vs 128K), making it better for long documents or conversations.
Capability fit: Grok 4 Fast >128k supports 1 capabilities (coding), while Command R supports 1 (multilingual).
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper: Grok 4 Fast >128k or Command R?
Grok 4 Fast >128k costs $0.4/1M input vs Command R at $0.5/1M input. Grok 4 Fast >128k is 20% cheaper on input tokens.
How do output prices compare between Grok 4 Fast >128k and Command R?
Grok 4 Fast >128k output: $1/1M, Command R output: $1.5/1M. Grok 4 Fast >128k is more economical for generation-heavy workloads.
What is Grok 4 Fast >128k best used for?
Grok 4 Fast >128k is best for budget-conscious applications, high-volume chatbots, and tasks where cost efficiency is the primary concern.
What is Command R best used for?
Command R is suited for complex reasoning, analysis, and tasks that benefit from its multilingual capabilities.