Model comparison
GPT-6 Luna vs Qwen3.8 Max
Qwen3.8 Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 56.8 to 53.3 on the Noometry Index. GPT-6 Luna costs 15× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen3.8 Max's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 37 shared benchmarks.
Summary
- They share 37 benchmarks with published results for both. GPT-6 Luna scores higher in 3 categories and Qwen3.8 Max in 7 categories; 10 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in agentic & tool use, where Qwen3.8 Max leads 45.4 to 33.3.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is Mystery Game Puzzles: 7% for GPT-6 Luna and 38% for Qwen3.8 Max.
- GPT-6 Luna is cheaper at $0.10 / $0.50 per million input/output tokens, against $2 / $6 for Qwen3.8 Max.
- GPT-6 Luna accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 1M.
Side by side
| GPT-6 Luna | Qwen3.8 Max | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | OpenAI | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 53.3 | 56.8 |
| Released | 2026-09-22 | 2026-08-02 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | 1.05M | 1M |
| Max output | 128K | 131K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.10 | $2 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.50 | $6 |
| Results tracked | 42 | 39 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding GPT-6 Luna leads
GPT-6 Luna: 55.5 (#25), Qwen3.8 Max: 53.5 (#29)
| Benchmark | GPT-6 Luna | Qwen3.8 Max |
|---|---|---|
| DeepSWE | 66.6% | 57.5% |
| LMArena WebDev | 1581 | 1674 |
| SciCode | 54.6% | 53.2% |
| LMArena Coding | 1439 | 1502 |
| FrontierCode | 42.4% | — |
| FrontierSWE | — | 17.8% |
| ALE-Bench | 1,577 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Qwen3.8 Max leads
GPT-6 Luna: 33.3 (#54), Qwen3.8 Max: 45.4 (#14)
| Benchmark | GPT-6 Luna | Qwen3.8 Max |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | 44.3% | 63.3% |
| GDP.pdf | 23% | 23.2% |
| τ²-bench Banking | — | 55.1% |
Reasoning Qwen3.8 Max leads
GPT-6 Luna: 48.2 (#41), Qwen3.8 Max: 54.4 (#26)
| Benchmark | GPT-6 Luna | Qwen3.8 Max |
|---|---|---|
| NYT Connections (extended) | 68.7% | 88.3% |
| CritPt | 19.4% | 20% |
| Chess Puzzles | 31% | 40% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1411 | 1496 |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 7% | 38% |
| DTBench | 90.1% | 92% |
| LMCA | 44.5% | 46.2% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 156.28 | 156.41 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 59.3% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 86.7% | — |
Math GPT-6 Luna leads
GPT-6 Luna: 76.1 (#15), Qwen3.8 Max: 73.2 (#20)
| Benchmark | GPT-6 Luna | Qwen3.8 Max |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 78.9% | 74.7% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 56.1% | 46.3% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 98.9% | 100% |
| ProofBench | 64% | 58% |
| LMArena Math | 1416 | 1499 |
Knowledge Qwen3.8 Max leads
GPT-6 Luna: 57.0 (#41), Qwen3.8 Max: 61.7 (#27)
| Benchmark | GPT-6 Luna | Qwen3.8 Max |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 90.5% | 92.7% |
| SimpleQA Verified | 41.4% | 47.3% |
| LMArena Expert | 1444 | 1507 |
Multimodal GPT-6 Luna leads
GPT-6 Luna: 42.4 (#30), Qwen3.8 Max: 37.2 (#75)
| Benchmark | GPT-6 Luna | Qwen3.8 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1217 | 1314 |
| Furniture Assembly | 44.2% | 20% |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | 31.2% | — |
Multilingual Qwen3.8 Max leads
GPT-6 Luna: 50.5 (#117), Qwen3.8 Max: 56.7 (#18)
| Benchmark | GPT-6 Luna | Qwen3.8 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1386 | 1472 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1433 | 1538 |
| LMArena French | 1420 | 1503 |
| LMArena German | 1369 | 1483 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1369 | 1467 |
| LMArena Korean | 1360 | 1461 |
| LMArena Russian | 1394 | 1481 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1393 | 1492 |
Instruction Following Qwen3.8 Max leads
GPT-6 Luna: 74.3 (#99), Qwen3.8 Max: 77.6 (#17)
| Benchmark | GPT-6 Luna | Qwen3.8 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1409 | 1479 |
Long Context Qwen3.8 Max leads
GPT-6 Luna: 43.0 (#111), Qwen3.8 Max: 45.6 (#31)
| Benchmark | GPT-6 Luna | Qwen3.8 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1409 | 1489 |
Writing & Preference Qwen3.8 Max leads
GPT-6 Luna: 58.3 (#119), Qwen3.8 Max: 67.1 (#30)
| Benchmark | GPT-6 Luna | Qwen3.8 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1391 | 1483 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1363 | 1479 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1396 | 1489 |
Frequently asked questions
Is GPT-6 Luna better than Qwen3.8 Max?
Qwen3.8 Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 56.8 to 53.3 on the Noometry Index. GPT-6 Luna costs 15× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen3.8 Max's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, GPT-6 Luna or Qwen3.8 Max?
GPT-6 Luna is cheaper. It lists at $0.10 per million input tokens and $0.50 per million output tokens; Qwen3.8 Max lists at $2 and $6.
Is GPT-6 Luna or Qwen3.8 Max better for coding?
GPT-6 Luna scores higher on coding benchmarks: 55.5 versus 53.5 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
GPT-6 Luna does, with 1.05M tokens against 1M.
How many benchmarks do GPT-6 Luna and Qwen3.8 Max share?
37 benchmarks have published results for both models. GPT-6 Luna has 42 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.8 Max has 39.