Command A Vision vs Lyria 3.5

At a Glance

Compare
Lyria 3.5Google DeepMind
Pricing and Limits
Context windowMaximum documented tokens128K1,049K
Model facts checkedAug 29, 2026View model evidence →Sep 22, 2026View model evidence →

Token prices are the lowest available sourced USD rates; input and output may use different providers. Cost ranking estimates output spend on LiveBench, not a full request bill. Ranking methodology →

Available Benchmarks

All benchmark results →
No Protocol-Matched Benchmark Yet.Results appear here only when both models share the same benchmark version, metric, evaluation protocol, and evidence class.

Side-by-Side Facts

FieldCommand A VisionLyria 3.5
DeveloperCohereGoogle DeepMind
FamilyCommand ALyria
ModelCommand A VisionLyria 3.5
VersionCommand A VisionLyria 3.5
Lifecycleactiveactive
ReleasedUnknown2026-07-29
Knowledge cutoff2024-06-01Unknown
Input modalitiesText, ImageText, Image
Output modalitiesTextText, Audio
Context window128K1,049K
Total parametersUnknownUnknown
Active parametersUnknownUnknown
LicenseUnknownUnknown
Open weightsNoNo
API availableYesYes
Self-hostableNoNo
Provider accessCohere (Standard)Google AI (Standard), Google Gemini (Standard)
Capabilitieschat, citations, multilingual, ocr, reasoning, structured_outputs, visiongeneration, image-to-music, lyrics, music-generation, synthid, vocals

Command A Vision Capabilities

chatcitationsmultilingualocrreasoningstructured outputsvision
Serving providers1
Canonical IDcoherelabs/command-a-vision-07-2025

Lyria 3.5 Capabilities

generationimage-to-musiclyricsmusic-generationsynthidvocals
Serving providers2
Canonical IDlyria-3.5

Primary Evidence

Sources and Freshness

Questions

Command A Vision vs Lyria 3.5 FAQs

Is Command A Vision or Lyria 3.5 better for coding?+

This comparison does not currently contain a protocol-matched coding benchmark for both Command A Vision and Lyria 3.5, so Model Markets cannot name a coding leader from pricing, context size, or capability labels alone.

Which is cheaper, Command A Vision or Lyria 3.5?+

Neither model has a directly sourced input price in this comparison. Neither model has a directly sourced output price in this comparison.

Which has a larger context window, Command A Vision or Lyria 3.5?+

Lyria 3.5 has the larger sourced context window. Command A Vision supports 128K and Lyria 3.5 supports 1,049K.

Which performs better in benchmarks, Command A Vision or Lyria 3.5?+

There is no overall benchmark winner: At least two independently verified, protocol-matched benchmarks are required for an overall winner.

Can Command A Vision or Lyria 3.5 be self-hosted?+

Both models have the same recorded self-hosting status: unsupported. Command A Vision is not marked open weight; Lyria 3.5 is not marked open weight.

Can Command A Vision and Lyria 3.5 understand images?+

Command A Vision is documented with image input; Lyria 3.5 is documented with image input. This reflects supported input modalities, not vision quality.

Which can generate longer answers, Command A Vision or Lyria 3.5?+

Lyria 3.5 has the larger sourced maximum output: Command A Vision supports 8K and Lyria 3.5 supports 66K output tokens.

Do Command A Vision and Lyria 3.5 support reasoning and tool use?+

Command A Vision: reasoning and image input. Lyria 3.5: image input. Feature support does not establish relative quality.

Which is available from more inference providers, Command A Vision or Lyria 3.5?+

Command A Vision has 1 sourced provider route; Lyria 3.5 has 2, so Lyria 3.5 has broader tracked availability.

Which offers better value, Command A Vision or Lyria 3.5?+

There is no universal value winner. Compare the input and output prices above with the matched benchmark result for your workload: cheaper tokens can be offset by different quality, token usage, latency, or provider availability.

Send Feedback