Created bymario-alka.dePowered bygodcore.denoob2claw.detricoma.de
Contributed byMario AlkaCohere

command-a-reasoning-08-2025

Performance benchmark · measured on 27.07.2026 10:46

Benchmark-IDrun-20260727-113142-e39c6a
Timebench 3 - Kombi (Prefill + Generation)111BRuntime: llama.cppQuantisierung: Q4_K_M
Generation6,57tok/s
Prefill98,11tok/s
Time to First Token86.763,00ms
Total duration600,00s
Concurrency10parallel
Ranking in the field
67of 76 systems

Performance benchmark · Primary metric: Generation-Speed (tok/s) · 10× concurrent

This run is better than 12 % of all comparable systems.
Generation 6,6 tok/s
-98 % vs Ø 275,8
Prefill 98,1 tok/s
-96 % vs Ø 2.440,1
Time to First Token 86.763 ms
-15 % vs Ø 101.921
Distribution in the field2 – 1.744 tok/s
Ø 276 Median Dieser Lauf

Wie schlägt sich dieser Benchmark mit anderen Modellen?

How does this benchmark compare on other GPUs?

Same model on different hardware · 10× concurrent · Generation (tok/s)

Hardware

GPU: NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ti · 16 GB VRAM
CPU: AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5975WX 32-Cores
RAM: 247 GB
Mainboard: ASUSTeK COMPUTER INC. Pro WS WRX80E-SAGE SE WIFI

Setup

Runtime: llama.cpp
Quantization: Q4_K_M
Model: command-a-reasoning-08-2025

Configuration

benchmark-konfiguration — run-20260727-113142-e39c6a
# LLM-Benchmark Konfiguration # Modell : command-a-reasoning-08-2025 # Engine : llama.cpp # Run-ID : run-20260727-113142-e39c6a # GPU : NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ti # CPU : AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5975WX 32-Cores # RAM : 247 GB bench@llm-benchmark:~$ /home/godcore/llama.cpp/build/bin/llama-server \ -m /home/godcore/.cache/huggingface/hub/models--DevQuasar--CohereLabs.command-a-reasoning-08-2025-GGUF/snapshots/924408415a0e807b935d0a0c4f316a1bc40a1051/CohereLabs.command-a-reasoning-08-2025.Q4_K_M-00001-of-00005.gguf \ --alias command-a-reasoning-08-2025 \ --host 0.0.0.0 \ --port 8000 \ -ngl 12 \ -c 16384 \ -np 4 \ --jinja
Engine?Die Inferenz-Software, die das Modell ausliefert (z.B. vLLM oder llama.cpp). Sie bestimmt Geschwindigkeit, unterstuetzte Modellformate und welche Parameter ueberhaupt verfuegbar sind.llamacpp
Modellalias?Der Name, unter dem das Modell ueber die API angesprochen wird. Genau dieser Wert muss im Request-Feld 'model' stehen.command-a-reasoning-08-2025
Kontextlaenge?Maximale Anzahl Tokens (Eingabe + erzeugte Ausgabe zusammen), die das Modell pro Anfrage verarbeiten kann.16384
Modellpfad?Pfad zur GGUF-Modelldatei, die geladen und ausgeliefert wird./home/godcore/.cache/huggingface/hub/models--DevQuasar--CohereLabs.command-a-reasoning-08-2025-GGUF/snapshots/924408415a0e807b935d0a0c4f316a1bc40a1051/CohereLabs.command-a-reasoning-08-2025.Q4_K_M-00001-of-00005.gguf
GPU-Layer?Anzahl der auf die GPU ausgelagerten Modell-Layer. Hoeher = mehr VRAM und schneller; der Rest laeuft auf der CPU. 999 = alles auf GPU.12
Kontext?Groesse des Kontextfensters in Token. 0 = der beim Training verwendete Kontext des Modells.16384
np4

All benchmarks of this model To leaderboard

Anzeige
Model comparison

command-a-reasoning-08-2025 on various hardware

All published performance runs of this model – each bubble a variant: position = prefill (X) × generation (Y), bubble size = number of runs. Closer to the top right = faster. ★ Marked gold = this benchmark.

GPUby graphics card

20415310251,00,001.0932.1863.279Prefill (tok/s)Generation (tok/s)NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Workstation Edition - 157,0 tok/s Generation, 1.435 tok/s Prefill, TTFT 25.033 ms (3 Laufe)NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 B...NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Max-Q Workstation Edition - 134,9 tok/s Generation, 1.476 tok/s Prefill, TTFT 29.419 ms (12 Laufe)NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 B...NVIDIA RTX A6000 - 95,5 tok/s Generation, 2.645 tok/s Prefill, TTFT 8.625 ms (6 Laufe)NVIDIA RTX A6000AMD Radeon AI PRO R9700 - 51,7 tok/s Generation, 401 tok/s Prefill, TTFT 53.503 ms (8 Laufe)AMD Radeon AI PRO R97...NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 Ti - 4,2 tok/s Generation, 90 tok/s Prefill, TTFT 72.246 ms (3 Laufe)NVIDIA GeForce RTX 30...NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 - 2,2 tok/s Generation, 60 tok/s Prefill, TTFT 108.625 ms (3 Laufe)NVIDIA GeForce RTX 50...Intel Arc Pro B70 - 0,0 tok/s Generation, 5 tok/s Prefill, TTFT 485.856 ms (1 Lauf)Intel Arc Pro B70NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ti - 6,7 tok/s Generation, 108 tok/s Prefill, TTFT 64.666 ms (3 Laufe) | DIESER LAUF★ NVIDIA GeForce RTX 50...
NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Workstation Edition 157,0 tok/sNVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Max-Q Workstation Edition 134,9 tok/sNVIDIA RTX A6000 95,5 tok/sAMD Radeon AI PRO R9700 51,7 tok/s★ NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ti 6,7 tok/s this runNVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 Ti 4,2 tok/sNVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 2,2 tok/sIntel Arc Pro B70 0,0 tok/s

CPUby processor

20415310251,00,006101.2201.829Prefill (tok/s)Generation (tok/s)AMD Ryzen 9 9950X 16-Core Processor - 157,0 tok/s Generation, 1.435 tok/s Prefill, TTFT 25.033 ms (3 Laufe)AMD Ryzen 9 9950X 16-...AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9965WX 24-Cores - 134,9 tok/s Generation, 1.476 tok/s Prefill, TTFT 29.419 ms (12 Laufe)AMD Ryzen Threadrippe...AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX 16-Cores - 95,5 tok/s Generation, 1.363 tok/s Prefill, TTFT 34.270 ms (14 Laufe)AMD Ryzen Threadrippe...AMD Ryzen 9 8945HX with Radeon Graphics - 4,2 tok/s Generation, 90 tok/s Prefill, TTFT 72.246 ms (3 Laufe)AMD Ryzen 9 8945HX wi...AMD Ryzen 7 5800X3D 8-Core Processor - 2,2 tok/s Generation, 60 tok/s Prefill, TTFT 108.625 ms (3 Laufe)AMD Ryzen 7 5800X3D 8...AMD Ryzen 9 7945HX with Radeon Graphics - 0,0 tok/s Generation, 5 tok/s Prefill, TTFT 485.856 ms (1 Lauf)AMD Ryzen 9 7945HX wi...AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5975WX 32-Cores - 6,7 tok/s Generation, 108 tok/s Prefill, TTFT 64.666 ms (3 Laufe) | DIESER LAUF★ AMD Ryzen Threadrippe...
AMD Ryzen 9 9950X 16-Core Processor 157,0 tok/sAMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9965WX 24-Cores 134,9 tok/sAMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX 16-Cores 95,5 tok/s★ AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5975WX 32-Cores 6,7 tok/s this runAMD Ryzen 9 8945HX with Radeon Graphics 4,2 tok/sAMD Ryzen 7 5800X3D 8-Core Processor 2,2 tok/sAMD Ryzen 9 7945HX with Radeon Graphics 0,0 tok/s

MBby mainboard

20415310251,00,005931.1861.778Prefill (tok/s)Generation (tok/s)ASUSTeK COMPUTER INC. ProArt X870E-CREATOR WIFI - 157,0 tok/s Generation, 1.435 tok/s Prefill, TTFT 25.033 ms (3 Laufe)ASUSTeK COMPUTER INC....ASUSTeK COMPUTER INC. Pro WS WRX90E-SAGE SE - 134,9 tok/s Generation, 1.415 tok/s Prefill, TTFT 32.031 ms (26 Laufe)ASUSTeK COMPUTER INC....Meigao Innovation Technology (Shen Zhen) Co., Ltd DRFXL (MotherBoard Series) - 4,2 tok/s Generation, 90 tok/s Prefill, TTFT 72.246 ms (3 Laufe)Meigao Innovation Tec...ASUSTeK COMPUTER INC. ROG STRIX B550-A GAMING - 2,2 tok/s Generation, 60 tok/s Prefill, TTFT 108.625 ms (3 Laufe)ASUSTeK COMPUTER INC....Shenzhen Meigao Electronic Equipment Co.,Ltd DRFXI (MotherBoard Series) - 0,0 tok/s Generation, 5 tok/s Prefill, TTFT 485.856 ms (1 Lauf)Shenzhen Meigao Elect...ASUSTeK COMPUTER INC. Pro WS WRX80E-SAGE SE WIFI - 6,7 tok/s Generation, 108 tok/s Prefill, TTFT 64.666 ms (3 Laufe) | DIESER LAUF★ ASUSTeK COMPUTER INC....
ASUSTeK COMPUTER INC. ProArt X870E-CREATOR WIFI 157,0 tok/sASUSTeK COMPUTER INC. Pro WS WRX90E-SAGE SE 134,9 tok/s★ ASUSTeK COMPUTER INC. Pro WS WRX80E-SAGE SE WIFI 6,7 tok/s this runMeigao Innovation Technology (Shen Zhen) Co., Ltd DRFXL (MotherBoard Series) 4,2 tok/sASUSTeK COMPUTER INC. ROG STRIX B550-A GAMING 2,2 tok/sShenzhen Meigao Electronic Equipment Co.,Ltd DRFXI (MotherBoard Series) 0,0 tok/s

ENGby engine

18515612696,867,52951.2432.1913.138Prefill (tok/s)Generation (tok/s)vLLM - 95,5 tok/s Generation, 2.645 tok/s Prefill, TTFT 8.625 ms (6 Laufe)vLLMllama.cpp - 157,0 tok/s Generation, 788 tok/s Prefill, TTFT 62.988 ms (33 Laufe) | DIESER LAUF★ llama.cpp
★ llama.cpp 157,0 tok/s this runvLLM 95,5 tok/s

DRVby driver

20415310251,00,004559101.365Prefill (tok/s)Generation (tok/s)unbekannt - 157,0 tok/s Generation, 1.102 tok/s Prefill, TTFT 43.277 ms (38 Laufe)unbekanntIntel 26.18.38308.4 - 0,0 tok/s Generation, 5 tok/s Prefill, TTFT 485.856 ms (1 Lauf)Intel 26.18.38308.4
unbekannt 157,0 tok/sIntel 26.18.38308.4 0,0 tok/s
💰 Economics

Economics of this run

Operating cost, TCO and comparison with the next-best runs of the same model at identical concurrency (10× concurrent). Methodology →

⚙️ ConfigurationAll metrics and charts below follow these settings – based on a 24-month runtime.Save to URLReset
⚡ Electricity price EUR/kWh
⚙️ System utilization 100 %
🖥️ Acquisition EUR
🔌 Idle 10 W
⚡ TDP 310 W
☁️ External LLM (API)
Electricity0.30 EUR/kWh
Avg power (incl. idle)310 W estimated (TDP)GPU 300 + Board 10 W full load
Avg cost / hourEUR 0.093
Electricity / 1M tokensEUR 3.93
Token / kWh76.30K
Acquisition (system)EUR 5,000 partial priceGPU EUR 994 · CPU EUR 1,880 · RAM EUR 1,976 · PSU EUR 150
Electricity (2 years)
TCO (2 years)EUR 6,629
Output tokens (2 years)414.38M
☁️ External LLM (API) – comparison
External LLM cost (2 years)
Savings vs. external (2 years)

All values above and the charts below take the configured system utilization into account: at X% the system generates only X% of the time, the rest it idles (10 W). Cost per hour drops (more idle), cost per token rises.

Cost over 2 years – electricity only

Cost over 2 years – incl. acquisition (TCO)

Speed vs. tokens per euro

Euro per 1M tokens

Comparison vs. API – economics per benchmark

command-a-reasoning-08-2025NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ticommand-a-reasoning-08-2025NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Workstation Editioncommand-a-reasoning-08-20253x NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Max-Q Workstation Editioncommand-a-reasoning-08-20253x NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Max-Q Workstation Edition
Electricity cost (24 mo.)
Acquisition cost
Total cost (TCO)
Generated tokens (24 mo.)
Token price via API
Break-even point (days)
Result (savings / extra cost)

Comparison with up to 3 next-best runs of this model at the same concurrency (at least one on different hardware). Power = GPU TDP + CPU (idle + 15 %) + board (estimated), acquisition = full system (GPU + CPU + board + RAM + PSU), prices = stored market prices.

Contributed by

Mario Alka Administrator

@marioalka

Ich bin Unternehmer, Softwareentwickler und KI-Enthusiast. Seit vielen Jahren entwickle ich Unternehmenssoftware und beschäftige mich inzwischen fast täglich mit lokalen LLMs, KI-Agenten und leistungsfähiger KI-Hardware.

Mit LLM-Benchmark.de möchte ich eine Plattform schaffen, auf der Modelle, GPUs und Agenten objektiv und reproduzierbar miteinander verglichen werden.