Model comparison
Gemini 2.0 Pro vs GPT-5.6 Luna
GPT-5.6 Luna is the stronger model overall, scoring 54.7 to 38.6 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 2 shared benchmarks.
GoogleSummary
- They share 2 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemini 2.0 Pro scores higher in 0 categories and GPT-5.6 Luna in 7 categories; 6 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where GPT-5.6 Luna leads 77.5 to 37.1.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is GPQA Diamond: 65.7% for Gemini 2.0 Pro and 91.6% for GPT-5.6 Luna.
Side by side
| Gemini 2.0 Pro | GPT-5.6 Luna | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | OpenAI | |
| Noometry Index | 38.6 | 54.7 |
| Released | 2025-02-05 | 2026-07-09 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | — | 1.05M |
| Max output | — | 128K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.20 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $1.20 |
| Results tracked | 14 | 51 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding GPT-5.6 Luna leads
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 37.4 (#182), GPT-5.6 Luna: 53.9 (#25)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | GPT-5.6 Luna |
|---|---|---|
| DeepSWE | — | 67.2% |
| FrontierCode | — | 39.8% |
| Aider Polyglot | 35.6% | — |
| CursorBench | — | 35.9% |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1517 |
| SciCode | — | 53.6% |
| WeirdML | — | 60.9% |
| LiveBench Coding | 63.5% | — |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1466 |
| ALE-Bench | — | 1,667 |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Gemini 2.0 Pro: —, GPT-5.6 Luna: 35.3 (#37)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | GPT-5.6 Luna |
|---|---|---|
| BALROG | — | 45.6% |
| GDP.pdf | — | 22.7% |
| Vending-Bench 2 | — | 4,095 |
Reasoning GPT-5.6 Luna leads
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 21.6 (#194), GPT-5.6 Luna: 47.5 (#38)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | GPT-5.6 Luna |
|---|---|---|
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 135.06 | 156.32 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | — | 59.5% |
| SimpleBench | — | 46.8% |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 49.1% |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 69.4% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | — | 88% |
| CritPt | — | 20.6% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 40% |
| EnigmaEval | 0.7% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 60.1% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1452 |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 21% |
| DTBench | — | 89.1% |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 68% | — |
| LMCA | — | 48.5% |
| Surface Evolver Bench | — | 61.9% |
| LiveBench | 65.1% | — |
Math GPT-5.6 Luna leads
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 37.1 (#101), GPT-5.6 Luna: 77.5 (#12)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | GPT-5.6 Luna |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 82.1% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | — | 61% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 98.3% |
| ProofBench | — | 60% |
| LiveBench Math | 71% | — |
| LMArena Math | — | 1455 |
| MATH Level 5 | 83.5% | — |
Knowledge GPT-5.6 Luna leads
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 36.5 (#156), GPT-5.6 Luna: 58.6 (#31)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | GPT-5.6 Luna |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 65.7% | 91.6% |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 41% |
| Confabulations | 18.4% | — |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1479 |
Multimodal Not comparable
Gemini 2.0 Pro: —, GPT-5.6 Luna: 43.0 (#22)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | GPT-5.6 Luna |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | — | 1259 |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | — | 22.6% |
| Furniture Assembly | — | 42.5% |
| LMArena Document | — | 1457 |
Multilingual Not comparable
Gemini 2.0 Pro: —, GPT-5.6 Luna: 53.0 (#73)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | GPT-5.6 Luna |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1418 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1469 |
| LMArena French | — | 1457 |
| LMArena German | — | 1459 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1416 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1414 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1428 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1445 |
Instruction Following Too close to call
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 75.6 (#57), GPT-5.6 Luna: 76.0 (#48)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | GPT-5.6 Luna |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 83.4% | — |
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1440 |
Long Context GPT-5.6 Luna leads
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 29.1 (#287), GPT-5.6 Luna: 43.9 (#78)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | GPT-5.6 Luna |
|---|---|---|
| Fiction.LiveBench | 41.7% | — |
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1437 |
Writing & Preference GPT-5.6 Luna leads
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 52.7 (#164), GPT-5.6 Luna: 68.3 (#27)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | GPT-5.6 Luna |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1432 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1397 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 1829 |
| EQ-Bench 4 | — | 1156 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1433 |
| LiveBench Language | 44.9% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemini 2.0 Pro better than GPT-5.6 Luna?
GPT-5.6 Luna is the stronger model overall, scoring 54.7 to 38.6 on the Noometry Index.
Is Gemini 2.0 Pro or GPT-5.6 Luna better for coding?
GPT-5.6 Luna scores higher on coding benchmarks: 53.9 versus 37.4 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Gemini 2.0 Pro and GPT-5.6 Luna share?
2 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 2.0 Pro has 14 scored results on Noometry and GPT-5.6 Luna has 51.