Alibaba Qwen 2.5 72B vs Cohere Command R 7B

Detailed comparison for LLMs

AlibabaCohere

On Guardion's LLM vulnerability Benchmark, Cohere Command R 7B is the more secure of the two: Qwen 2.5 72B scores 26.3% and Command R 7B scores 25.8% on attack success rate (ASR) (lower is better).

Head-to-Head Overview

Command R 7B is the overall winner in this comparison!

Attack Success Rate (lower is safer)

ASR for Alibaba Qwen 2.5 72B vs Cohere Command R 7B. Green marks the safer model on each metric.

Overall (ASR)

Qwen 2.5 72B
26.3%
Command R 7B
25.8%

TAP Attack Method (ASR)

Qwen 2.5 72B
55.2%
Command R 7B
45.9%

Crescendo Attack Method (ASR)

Qwen 2.5 72B
23.7%
Command R 7B
26.2%

Zero-Shot (ASR)

Qwen 2.5 72B
0.3%
Command R 7B

Key Highlights

  • Cohere Command R 7B has a lower Overall (ASR).
  • Cohere Command R 7B has a lower TAP Attack Method (ASR).
  • Alibaba Qwen 2.5 72B has a lower Crescendo Attack Method (ASR).

Security Profile

Outward is better on every axis.

OverallTAPCrescendoZero-Shot
Qwen 2.5 72B
Command R 7B
Full security profile
Alibaba Qwen 2.5 72B
Full security profile
Cohere Command R 7B

Frequently asked questions

Is Alibaba Qwen 2.5 72B or Cohere Command R 7B more secure?

On Guardion's LLM vulnerability Benchmark, Cohere Command R 7B is the more secure of the two: Qwen 2.5 72B scores 26.3% and Command R 7B scores 25.8% on attack success rate (ASR) (lower is better).

What is the attack success rate (ASR) of Qwen 2.5 72B vs Command R 7B?

Qwen 2.5 72B has a 26.3% ASR and Command R 7B has a 25.8% ASR — the share of adversarial prompts that succeed across zero-shot, TAP, and Crescendo attacks. Lower is safer.

How were Qwen 2.5 72B and Command R 7B tested?

Both were red-teamed with the HarmBench framework across zero-shot, TAP (Tree of Attacks with Pruning), and Crescendo multi-turn attacks, scored by Attack Success Rate.

Related Comparisons