Model comparison
GPT-5.6 Luna vs Granite 4.0 Micro
GPT-5.6 Luna is the stronger model overall, scoring 54.6 to 29.0 on the Noometry Index. Granite 4.0 Micro costs 11× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GPT-5.6 Luna's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 3 shared benchmarks.
Summary
- They share 3 benchmarks with published results for both. GPT-5.6 Luna scores higher in 5 categories and Granite 4.0 Micro in 0 categories; 5 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where GPT-5.6 Luna leads 77.7 to 12.0.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 98.3% for GPT-5.6 Luna and 2.8% for Granite 4.0 Micro.
- Granite 4.0 Micro is cheaper at $0.017 / $0.11 per million input/output tokens, against $0.20 / $1.20 for GPT-5.6 Luna.
- GPT-5.6 Luna accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 131K.
- Granite 4.0 Micro has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| GPT-5.6 Luna | Granite 4.0 Micro | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | OpenAI | IBM |
| Noometry Index | 54.6 | 29.0 |
| Released | 2026-07-09 | 2025-10-02 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 1.05M | 131K |
| Max output | 128K | 118K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.20 | $0.017 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $1.20 | $0.11 |
| Results tracked | 52 | 8 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Not comparable
GPT-5.6 Luna: 54.5 (#28), Granite 4.0 Micro: —
| Benchmark | GPT-5.6 Luna | Granite 4.0 Micro |
|---|---|---|
| DeepSWE | 67.2% | — |
| FrontierCode | 39.8% | — |
| CursorBench | 35.9% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1519 | — |
| SciCode | 53.6% | — |
| WeirdML | 60.9% | — |
| LMArena Coding | 1466 | — |
| ALE-Bench | 1,667 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
GPT-5.6 Luna: 34.4 (#45), Granite 4.0 Micro: —
| Benchmark | GPT-5.6 Luna | Granite 4.0 Micro |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | 43% | — |
| BALROG | 45.6% | — |
| GDP.pdf | 22.7% | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 4,095 | — |
Reasoning GPT-5.6 Luna leads
GPT-5.6 Luna: 47.6 (#43), Granite 4.0 Micro: 19.2 (#265)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.6 Luna | Granite 4.0 Micro |
|---|---|---|
| Chess Puzzles | 40% | 0% |
| 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% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1451 | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 21% | — |
| DTBench | 89.1% | — |
| LMCA | 48.5% | — |
| Surface Evolver Bench | 61.9% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 156.39 | — |
Math GPT-5.6 Luna leads
GPT-5.6 Luna: 77.7 (#14), Granite 4.0 Micro: 12.0 (#307)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.6 Luna | Granite 4.0 Micro |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 98.3% | 2.8% |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 82.1% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 61% | — |
| ProofBench | 60% | — |
| Omni-MATH | — | 20.9% |
| LMArena Math | 1458 | — |
Knowledge GPT-5.6 Luna leads
GPT-5.6 Luna: 58.5 (#34), Granite 4.0 Micro: 9.9 (#304)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.6 Luna | Granite 4.0 Micro |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 91.6% | 28.3% |
| SimpleQA Verified | 41% | — |
| MMLU-Pro | — | 39.5% |
| GPQA (HELM) | — | 30.7% |
| LMArena Expert | 1478 | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
GPT-5.6 Luna: 42.7 (#28), Granite 4.0 Micro: —
| Benchmark | GPT-5.6 Luna | Granite 4.0 Micro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1258 | — |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | 22.6% | — |
| Furniture Assembly | 42.5% | — |
| LMArena Document | 1457 | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
GPT-5.6 Luna: 52.8 (#78), Granite 4.0 Micro: —
| Benchmark | GPT-5.6 Luna | Granite 4.0 Micro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1417 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1470 | — |
| LMArena French | 1456 | — |
| LMArena German | 1454 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1411 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1415 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1428 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1448 | — |
Instruction Following GPT-5.6 Luna leads
GPT-5.6 Luna: 75.6 (#57), Granite 4.0 Micro: 69.9 (#169)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.6 Luna | Granite 4.0 Micro |
|---|---|---|
| IFEval | — | 84.9% |
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1437 | — |
Long Context Not comparable
GPT-5.6 Luna: 43.9 (#82), Granite 4.0 Micro: —
| Benchmark | GPT-5.6 Luna | Granite 4.0 Micro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1436 | — |
Writing & Preference GPT-5.6 Luna leads
GPT-5.6 Luna: 68.0 (#29), Granite 4.0 Micro: 46.7 (#216)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.6 Luna | Granite 4.0 Micro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1431 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1396 | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1829 | — |
| WildBench | — | 67% |
| EQ-Bench 4 | 1156 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1434 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is GPT-5.6 Luna better than Granite 4.0 Micro?
GPT-5.6 Luna is the stronger model overall, scoring 54.6 to 29.0 on the Noometry Index. Granite 4.0 Micro costs 11× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GPT-5.6 Luna's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, GPT-5.6 Luna or Granite 4.0 Micro?
Granite 4.0 Micro is cheaper. It lists at $0.017 per million input tokens and $0.11 per million output tokens; GPT-5.6 Luna lists at $0.20 and $1.20.
Which has the bigger context window?
GPT-5.6 Luna does, with 1.05M tokens against 131K.
How many benchmarks do GPT-5.6 Luna and Granite 4.0 Micro share?
3 benchmarks have published results for both models. GPT-5.6 Luna has 52 scored results on Noometry and Granite 4.0 Micro has 8.