Alibaba Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct vs Cohere Command 2X
Detailed comparison for LLMs
On Guardion's LLM vulnerability Benchmark, Cohere Command 2X is the more secure of the two: Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct scores 40.0% and Command 2X scores 39.4% on attack success rate (ASR) (lower is better). One or both scores are estimated from public safety evaluations pending a Guardion benchmark run.
Head-to-Head Overview
Command 2X is the overall winner in this comparison!
Attack Success Rate (lower is safer)
ASR for Alibaba Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct vs Cohere Command 2X. Green marks the safer model on each metric. Only the overall score is available for estimated models.
Overall (ASR)
TAP Attack Method (ASR)
Crescendo Attack Method (ASR)
Zero-Shot (ASR)
Key Highlights
- Cohere Command 2X has a lower Overall (ASR).
- Cohere Command 2X has a lower Zero-Shot (ASR).
Security Profile
Outward is better on every axis.
Frequently asked questions
Is Alibaba Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct or Cohere Command 2X more secure?
On Guardion's LLM vulnerability Benchmark, Cohere Command 2X is the more secure of the two: Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct scores 40.0% and Command 2X scores 39.4% on attack success rate (ASR) (lower is better). One or both scores are estimated from public safety evaluations pending a Guardion benchmark run.
What is the attack success rate (ASR) of Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct vs Command 2X?
Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct has a 40.0% ASR and Command 2X has a 39.4% ASR — the share of adversarial prompts that succeed across zero-shot, TAP, and Crescendo attacks. Lower is safer.
How were Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct and Command 2X 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.