Model comparison
GPT-6 Luna vs Qwen3.7 Flash
GPT-6 Luna is the stronger model overall, scoring 45.1 to 39.5 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3.7 Flash costs 3.6× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GPT-6 Luna's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 1 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 1 benchmark with published results for both. GPT-6 Luna scores higher in 1 category and Qwen3.7 Flash in 2 categories; 3 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Qwen3.7 Flash leads 48.9 to 40.1.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is NYT Connections (extended): 68.7% for GPT-6 Luna and 43.8% for Qwen3.7 Flash.
- Qwen3.7 Flash is cheaper at $0.03 / $0.13 per million input/output tokens, against $0.10 / $0.50 for GPT-6 Luna.
- GPT-6 Luna accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 1M.
Side by side
| GPT-6 Luna | Qwen3.7 Flash | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | OpenAI | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 45.1 | 39.5 |
| Released | 2026-09-22 | 2026-07-15 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | 1.05M | 1M |
| Max output | 128K | 131K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.10 | $0.03 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.50 | $0.13 |
| Results tracked | 18 | 7 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Not comparable
GPT-6 Luna: 54.7 (#24), Qwen3.7 Flash: —
| Benchmark | GPT-6 Luna | Qwen3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| DeepSWE | 66.6% | — |
| FrontierCode | 42.4% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1583 | — |
| LMArena Coding | 1448 | — |
Reasoning GPT-6 Luna leads
GPT-6 Luna: 31.7 (#68), Qwen3.7 Flash: 27.3 (#108)
| Benchmark | GPT-6 Luna | Qwen3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| NYT Connections (extended) | 68.7% | 43.8% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 23% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1415 | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 15% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 144.62 |
Math Qwen3.7 Flash leads
GPT-6 Luna: 35.6 (#140), Qwen3.7 Flash: 37.3 (#100)
| Benchmark | GPT-6 Luna | Qwen3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 19.3% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 86.7% |
| LMArena Math | 1396 | — |
Knowledge Qwen3.7 Flash leads
GPT-6 Luna: 40.1 (#110), Qwen3.7 Flash: 48.9 (#69)
| Benchmark | GPT-6 Luna | Qwen3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | — | 82.3% |
| LMArena Expert | 1458 | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
GPT-6 Luna: 42.0 (#27), Qwen3.7 Flash: —
| Benchmark | GPT-6 Luna | Qwen3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Furniture Assembly | 44.2% | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
GPT-6 Luna: 51.0 (#111), Qwen3.7 Flash: —
| Benchmark | GPT-6 Luna | Qwen3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1390 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1425 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1392 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1416 | — |
Instruction Following Not comparable
GPT-6 Luna: 74.7 (#85), Qwen3.7 Flash: —
| Benchmark | GPT-6 Luna | Qwen3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1414 | — |
Long Context Not comparable
GPT-6 Luna: 43.3 (#95), Qwen3.7 Flash: —
| Benchmark | GPT-6 Luna | Qwen3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1417 | — |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
GPT-6 Luna: 58.4 (#115), Qwen3.7 Flash: —
| Benchmark | GPT-6 Luna | Qwen3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1392 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1357 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1400 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is GPT-6 Luna better than Qwen3.7 Flash?
GPT-6 Luna is the stronger model overall, scoring 45.1 to 39.5 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3.7 Flash costs 3.6× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GPT-6 Luna's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, GPT-6 Luna or Qwen3.7 Flash?
Qwen3.7 Flash is cheaper. It lists at $0.03 per million input tokens and $0.13 per million output tokens; GPT-6 Luna lists at $0.10 and $0.50.
Which has the bigger context window?
GPT-6 Luna does, with 1.05M tokens against 1M.
How many benchmarks do GPT-6 Luna and Qwen3.7 Flash share?
1 benchmark has published results for both models. GPT-6 Luna has 18 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.7 Flash has 7.