Command R (08-2024) vs Hy-MT2-1.8B: which should you choose in 2026?
Command R (08-2024) (by Cohere) and Hy-MT2-1.8B (by Tencent) are compared below. Here is how they stack up on benchmarks, price, and capabilities, and which one to pick in 2026.
There are not enough shared, protocol-compatible benchmark results to declare a performance leader.
Hy-MT2-1.8B is about 3.4× cheaper on a blended 3:1 input/output basis ($0.07725 vs $0.2625 per 1M tokens).
Command R (08-2024) has the larger context window (128,000 tokens vs 8,192 tokens).
Choose Command R (08-2024) if…
- • you work with longer documents, transcripts, or codebases
Choose Hy-MT2-1.8B if…
- • lower blended API cost matters for your workload
The benchmark count includes only results measured with a matching benchmark version and protocol. Arena scores are shown separately. Missing, preliminary, and incompatible data is not treated as a controlled win. Published point-score comparisons are labeled separately when protocol details are incomplete. For text-output models, the verdict also compares token pricing and context windows.
Performance benchmarks
Every value links to its source. A dash means that no reviewed result is available for that exact model and protocol.
| Benchmark | Command R (08-2024) | Hy-MT2-1.8B |
|---|---|---|
A 657-task benchmark of multi-step work across simulated SaaS applications in six business domains. The Artificial Analysis protocol reports a guardrail-aware score and is distinct from both the public Zapier split and the unrelated dynamic AutoBench framework. Guardrail-aware score | — | — |
A benchmark of difficult, verifiable information-seeking questions designed to measure an agent's ability to locate hard-to-find facts through web browsing. Accuracy | — | — |
A verified computer-use benchmark in which multimodal agents operate desktop applications and are graded from the resulting environment state. Mean task reward | — | — |
A human-validated subset of real GitHub issues used to measure whether a coding agent can produce repository patches that resolve the associated tests. Resolved | — | — |
Version 2.1 of the benchmark for completing realistic tasks in terminal environments. Harness, resource limits, and attempt count are part of the protocol. Mean task success | — | — |
A dynamic LLM evaluation framework in which models generate questions, answer them, and participate in reciprocal peer assessment. AutoBench is distinct from Zapier's AutomationBench. Weighted peer-assessment score | — | — |
The highest-quality subset of Graduate-Level Google-Proof Q&A, designed to test expert-level scientific reasoning in biology, physics, and chemistry. Accuracy | — | — |
A 2,500-question expert-level benchmark spanning dozens of academic fields. Tool-assisted and no-tools results are separate protocols and must not be merged. Accuracy | — | — |
| Arena preference scores | ||
Human preference score | 1250 ±7 | — |
Benchmark sources
Reviewed evidence last updated 2026-08-09. Arena data last refreshed Aug 25, 2026.
Pricing, capabilities, and model facts
| Feature | Command R (08-2024) | Hy-MT2-1.8B |
|---|---|---|
| Context & model facts | ||
| Developer | Cohere | Tencent |
| API provider | Cohere | Tencent |
| Input context | 128,000 tokens | 8,192 tokens |
| Maximum output | 4,000 tokens | 4,096 tokens |
| Released | — | — |
| Added to Writingmate | Aug 30, 2024 | Aug 20, 2026 |
| License | Not available | Not available |
| Knowledge cutoff | 2024-03-31 | — |
| Capabilities | ||
| Inputs | Text | Text |
| Outputs | Text | Text |
| Provider endpoint accepts tool parameters | Yes | No |
| Reasoning | No | No |
| Vision | No | No |
| Image Generation | No | No |
| Video Generation | No | No |
| API pricing | ||
| Input (per 1M tokens) | $0.15 | $0.044 |
| Output (per 1M tokens) | $0.60 | $0.177 |
| Blended 3:1 input/output | $0.2625 | $0.07725 |
| API performance | ||
| p95 latency | Not measured | Not measured |
| Output throughput | Not measured | Not measured |
| Writingmate shows API performance only when both models have enough observations from the same measurement window, prompt profile, and provider. Third-party latency values are not copied into this table. | ||
Data sources
- Writingmate model catalog (pricing, limits, and availability)
Catalog data last updated Aug 20, 2026.
Why Pay for Multiple Subscriptions?
Comparing Command R (08-2024) from Cohere with Hy-MT2-1.8B from Tencent? Instead of managing separate API keys and subscriptions, get both with Writingmate.
| Plan | Price | Command R (08-2024) | Hy-MT2-1.8B | AI Images | AI Video |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Writingmate Pro Most popular | $20/mo | Included | Included | Nano Banana Pro, FLUX.2, DALL-E & more | Sora 2, VEO 3.1 |
Writingmate Ultimate Power users | $60/mo | Included | Included | Nano Banana Pro, FLUX.2, DALL-E & more | Sora 2, VEO 3.1 |
Command R (08-2024) vs Hy-MT2-1.8B FAQ
Which is better, Command R (08-2024) or Hy-MT2-1.8B?
There are not enough shared, protocol-compatible benchmark results to declare a performance leader. Hy-MT2-1.8B is about 3.4× cheaper on a blended 3:1 input/output basis ($0.07725 vs $0.2625 per 1M tokens). Command R (08-2024) has the larger context window (128,000 tokens vs 8,192 tokens).
Which model is cheaper to use through an API?
Hy-MT2-1.8B is about 3.4× cheaper on a blended 3:1 input/output basis ($0.07725 vs $0.2625 per 1M tokens).
Which model supports more context?
Command R (08-2024) has the larger context window (128,000 tokens vs 8,192 tokens).
Can I switch between Command R (08-2024) and Hy-MT2-1.8B?
Yes. Use the model selector on this page to open any current Writingmate model comparison. You can also run the same prompt with both models in Writingmate.
Related comparisons
More Command R (08-2024) comparisons
Muse Spark 1.2 Contributor
Meta
Muse Spark 1.2 contributor tier is a reasoning model from Meta designed for developers who want to start building at an even lower cost.
DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision Exp
DeepSeek
DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision Exp is a model by DeepSeek.
Ox Alpha
Stealth
Ox Alpha is a reasoning model designed for coding, sustained agentic work, and production workloads.
Hy-MT2-30B-A3B
Tencent
Hy-MT2-30B-A3B is Tencent's flagship translation model in the Hy-MT2 family.
Hy-MT2-7B
Tencent
Hy-MT2-7B is a 7B-parameter translation model from Tencent.
GLM 5.3
Z.AI
GLM-5.3 is a large-scale reasoning model from Z.ai, built for complex software engineering and long-horizon agent tasks.
More Hy-MT2-1.8B comparisons
Muse Spark 1.2 Contributor
Meta
Muse Spark 1.2 contributor tier is a reasoning model from Meta designed for developers who want to start building at an even lower cost.
DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision Exp
DeepSeek
DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision Exp is a model by DeepSeek.
Ox Alpha
Stealth
Ox Alpha is a reasoning model designed for coding, sustained agentic work, and production workloads.
GLM 5.3
Z.AI
GLM-5.3 is a large-scale reasoning model from Z.ai, built for complex software engineering and long-horizon agent tasks.
Qwen3.8 27B
Qwen
Qwen3.8 27B is an open-weight dense vision-language model from Qwen.
Gemini 3.7 Flash
Gemini 3.7 Flash is a multimodal model from Google for fast agentic workflows, coding, and complex multi-step reasoning.