Head-to-Head Model Comparison

GPT-5.6 Luna vs Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite

Benchmarks, API Token Pricing, Context Window & Speed Comparison

Vérifié par l’équipe de recherche de GetInfoUsDernière révision : October 2026Politique éditoriale
Partager
Related topics (12)
AI CompareAI BenchmarkToken PricingModel CostModel SpecsSWE-bench CodingModel VersusWhich AI ModelLLM Speed & LatencyReasoning ModelsExtended ThinkingPrompt Caching ROI
GPT-5.6 Luna vs Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite: Benchmarks, Pricing & Speed Comparison

GPT-5.6 Luna by OpenAI and Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite by Google represent two of the frontier AI models analyzed in our comprehensive 2026 AI benchmark and LLM comparison. In this head-to-head evaluation, we examine API token pricing, context window specifications, inference speed (tokens per second), and empirical reasoning performance. From a pure economic perspective, GPT-5.6 Luna holds a notable pricing advantage for token ingestion. On output generation, GPT-5.6 Luna is more economical per million generated tokens. In data-heavy architectures requiring extensive repository or document analysis, GPT-5.6 Luna provides an expanded memory horizon with 1,050K tokens. In latency-sensitive production environments, Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite leads in tokens-per-second throughput, making it ideal for real-time conversational agents and high-concurrency workflows. Below is the complete empirical head-to-head breakdown across cost, speed, context, and capability matrices.

Comparaison Face-à-Face (VS)

Changez et Comparez les Modèles

Select any AI models from our verified benchmark database to generate live side-by-side matrices.

Profile
Profile
Multi-Model Arena Stack:
5-Model Matrix Workbench
Popular Matchups:
OpenAI

GPT-5.6 Luna

Efficace 5.6

un economical GPT-5.6 palier pour rapide, élevé-volume travail.

Intelligence Index57 / 100
Input Token:

$0.20 / 1M

Output Token:

$1.20 / 1M

Context Window:

1.05M tokens

SWE-bench Verified:

63.5%

Google

Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite

Flash efficace

sous-dollar multimodal raisonnement moteur tuned pour massif d'entreprise traffic et en temps réel subagents.

Intelligence Index69 / 100
Input Token:

$0.40 / 1M

Output Token:

$2.00 / 1M

Context Window:

1.05M tokens

SWE-bench Verified:

N/A

Différences Clés en un Coup d’Œil

  • GPT-5.6 Luna is 1.8x cheaper for API usage (input + output tokens combined).
  • GPT-5.6 Luna has a larger context window (1M vs 1M tokens).
  • Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite is faster at 240 tok/s vs 230 tok/s.
Need definitions for token pricing, context, or benchmarks?Explore AI Glossary →
CaractéristiqueGPT-5.6 LunaGemini 3.5 Flash-Lite
Intelligence Index
Composite reasoning & knowledge score (0-100)
5769
Provider
OpenAIGoogle
Input Price
Cost per million input tokens
$0.20 / 1M$0.40 / 1M
Output Price
Cost per million output tokens
$1.20 / 1M$2.00 / 1M
Blended Price
Weighted 7:2:1 cache:input:output per 1M
$0.17 / 1M$0.35 / 1M
Context Window
Maximum input + output tokens
1.05M tokens~1,575 A4 pages of text1.05M tokens~1,573 A4 pages of text
Max Output Tokens
Per single request
128K33K
Throughput Speed
Tokens generated per second
230 tok/s240 tok/s
SWE-bench Verified
Real-world software engineering
63.5%N/A
GPQA Diamond
Graduate-level reasoning
70.5%N/A
Cached Input Price
Prompt caching discount per 1M tokens
$0.02 / 1M$0.10 / 1M

Qui gagne où ?

At-a-glance decision framework
Code

Evaluations ongoing

Coût
GPT-5.6 Luna
1.8x cheaper monthly runtime
Vitesse
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite
+4% faster generation
Contexte
GPT-5.6 Luna
1.05M tokens window

Scores de Benchmarks Vérifiés

Official evaluation metrics verified by independent third-party research labs.

GPT-5.6 LunaGemini 3.5 Flash-Lite
SWE-bench Verified (Autonomous Coding)

Industry benchmark evaluating real-world GitHub issue resolution and multi-file debugging.

63.5%vsN/A
GPQA Diamond (Doctorate-Level Science & Math)

Challenging questions created by domain experts to test complex PhD-level reasoning.

70.5%vsN/A
MMLU-Pro (Multi-task Language Understanding)

Hardened reasoning and academic knowledge benchmark with reduced lucky-guess probability.

83.5%vs81.2%
LMSYS Chatbot Arena Elo

Crowdsourced human preference evaluation based on blind, head-to-head model battles.

1368ptsvs1375pts
Humanity's Last Exam (Frontier Expert Knowledge)

Extremely difficult, closed-ended questions spanning the frontier of human expert knowledge.

11.4%vsN/A
Terminal-Bench (Agentic Coding & Terminal Use)

Autonomous multi-step tasks executed inside a real command-line terminal environment.

38.5%vsN/A
SciCode (Scientific Computing)

Research-grade coding problems drawn from real scientific and numerical workloads.

36%vsN/A
LiveCodeBench (Competitive Coding)

Contamination-free competitive programming problems collected continuously over time.

62.5%vsN/A
AIME (Advanced Math Competition)

American Invitational Mathematics Examination — multi-step Olympiad-level reasoning.

87%vsN/A
Long-Context Reasoning

Accuracy when reasoning over very large inputs that fill the model context window.

76.5%vsN/A
Generation Speed (Throughput)

Tokens emitted per second during active generation streaming.

230 tok/s vs240 tok/s

Latence et Temps de Réponse

Time to first token (TTFT) and estimated end-to-end response time for a typical 500-token response.

Time to First Token (TTFT)Lower is better
GPT-5.6 Luna0.42s
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite0.29s
Est. End-to-End Response (500 tokens)TTFT + generation time
GPT-5.6 Luna2.59s
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite2.37s

Simulateur Interactif de Coût de Tokens

Adjust sliders to calculate projected monthly cloud API spending with prompt caching discounts.

100K / day
10K500K1M
30K / day
5K150K300K
50% cached
0% (Cold)50%90% (Warm)
GPT-5.6 Luna Monthly API Bill
$1.41 / month
$0.2/1M in · $1.2/1M out
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite Monthly API Bill
$2.55 / month
$0.4/1M in · $2/1M out
GPT-5.6 Luna saves approximately $1.14 / month (45%) under this workload.1.8x Savings

GPT-5.6 Luna · Strengths & Key Advantages

  • très cheap tandis que keeping le 1M fenêtre de contexte
  • rapide enough pour en temps réel pipelines
  • très solide débit par dollar
Considerations & Trade-offs
  • Weak raisonnement par rapport au Sol et Terra tiers
  • pas suitable pour complexe analyse ou long plans

Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite · Strengths & Key Advantages

  • Economical élevé-volume tarification
  • rapide exécution avec faible latence
  • 1M fenêtre de contexte
Considerations & Trade-offs
  • moins adept à profond mathématique proofs
  • texte et vision seulement (no audio entrée)

Token Use & Task Economics

Estimated cost and token consumption to complete one representative agentic task.

MetricGPT-5.6 LunaGemini 3.5 Flash-Lite
Cost per Task
Estimated USD to finish one task
$0.19$0.55
Output Tokens / Task
Tokens generated per task
46K18K
Reasoning Tokens / Task
Thinking tokens burned per task
20K7K

Spécifications Techniques

Architecture, release timeline, capabilities, and modalities.

CaractéristiqueGPT-5.6 LunaGemini 3.5 Flash-Lite
Official API Model ID (SDK)gpt-5-6-lunamodels/gemini-3-5-flash-lite
API ProtocolOpenAI Responses API & Chat Completions v1Google Gemini API (generateContent) + OpenAI-Compatible SDK
Release Date2026-072026-07
Knowledge CutoffFebruary 2026March 2026
ArchitectureEfficient compact reasoning modelLightweight efficient multimodal transformer
ParametersConfidentialConfidential
Enterprise Rate Limits (RPM / TPM)10,000 – 30,000 RPM (Tier 5 Enterprise) · 4,000,000 – 10,000,000 TPM10,000 – 30,000 RPM (Tier 5 Enterprise) · 4,000,000 – 10,000,000 TPM
Long-Context Tier (>128K/200K)Flat rate ($0.2/1M in) across full 1050K windowStandard rate up to 200K tokens; 2x input/output tier above 200K tokens
Prompt Cache Policy & TTLAutomatic prefix caching at $0.02/1M (no extra cache-write fee)Implicit + Explicit Context Caching at $0.1/1M with configurable TTL
Computer Use / GUI AgentSupported (Screen coordinate grounding, browser & desktop GUI action loops)Supported (Screen coordinate grounding, browser & desktop GUI action loops)
MCP & Parallel Tool CallingNative MCP Client/Server ready · Parallel function calling · 100% Strict JSON SchemaNative MCP Client/Server ready · Parallel function calling · 100% Strict JSON Schema
Web Search Grounding & SandboxNative Web Search tool + Hosted Code Interpreter & File Search RAGBuilt-in Google Search Grounding + Managed Python Code Execution Sandbox
Official Fine-Tuning SupportSupervised Fine-Tuning (SFT), Direct Preference (DPO) & Reinforcement Fine-Tuning (RFT)Vertex AI Supervised Adapter Tuning & Context Distillation
Multimodal Token BillingText BPE (~4 chars/token) · Vision (~258–765 tokens per image tile)Text BPE (~4 chars/token) · Vision (~258–765 tokens per image tile)
Quantization & Min GPU VRAMCloud-Hosted Proprietary (FP8 / BF16 Tensor Core Cluster) · Zero Local VRAM Required (100% Serverless Cloud API)Cloud-Hosted Proprietary (FP8 / BF16 Tensor Core Cluster) · Zero Local VRAM Required (100% Serverless Cloud API)
Safety & Frontier ClassificationOpenAI Preparedness Framework Audited & System Card PublishedGoogle DeepMind Frontier Safety Framework Verified
Enterprise Compliance (ZDR/HIPAA/SOC2)SOC2 Type II · GDPR · Zero Data Retention (ZDR) & HIPAA BAA Available on Enterprise TierSOC2 Type II · GDPR · Zero Data Retention (ZDR) & HIPAA BAA Available on Enterprise Tier
Input Modalitiestext, visiontext, vision
Output Modalitiestexttext

GPT-5.6 Luna vs Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite: Réponses Rapides (FAQ)

Which is more intelligent, GPT-5.6 Luna or Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite?

Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite is more intelligent. It scores 69 compared with 57 on the composite Intelligence Index.

Which model is faster?

Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite is faster, generating 240 tokens per second compared with 230 tokens per second.

Which model is cheaper to run?

GPT-5.6 Luna is cheaper at $0.17 per 1M tokens blended, compared with $0.35 (7:2:1 cache:input:output ratio).

Which model has lower latency?

Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite has lower latency, with a time to first token of 0.29s compared with 0.42s.

Which model has a larger context window?

GPT-5.6 Luna has a larger context window, supporting 1.05M tokens compared with 1.05M tokens.

Verdict

Verdict & Model Selection Recommendation: Choose GPT-5.6 Luna if your priority is High-throughput classification, extraction and routing. Its performance in demanding tasks justifies its operational token cost. Choose Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite if your workflow prioritizes Autonomous subagent loops, summarization, and data transformation. For large-scale batch processing or customer-facing conversational interfaces, its balance of speed and economics delivers superior ROI.

Questions fréquentes

How does GPT-5.6 Luna compare to Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite in API token pricing and cost per token?+

GPT-5.6 Luna costs $0.20 per 1M input tokens and $1.20 per 1M output tokens, whereas Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite costs $0.40 input and $2.00 output. Overall, GPT-5.6 Luna is the more cost-effective model for high-volume API pipelines. Both models support prompt caching discounts of up to 90% for repeated prompt prefixes.

Which model has a larger context window: GPT-5.6 Luna or Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite?+

GPT-5.6 Luna supports a context window of 1,050K tokens (~788k words), while Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite supports 1,049K tokens (~786k words). Therefore, GPT-5.6 Luna can process more textual data and document context in a single prompt.

Which AI model is better for software engineering and coding: GPT-5.6 Luna or Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite?+

GPT-5.6 Luna scores 63.5% on SWE-bench Verified, while Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite scores competitively for software generation. For complex autonomous debugging and agentic engineering, GPT-5.6 Luna provides robust code generation and tool calling.

What is the difference in reasoning capability and extended thinking between GPT-5.6 Luna and Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite?+

GPT-5.6 Luna features native chain-of-thought extended thinking mode with configurable reasoning effort. In contrast, Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite provides chain-of-thought reasoning depth for complex math and science.

How does inference speed (tokens per second) compare between GPT-5.6 Luna and Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite?+

GPT-5.6 Luna generates approximately 230 tokens per second, while Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite delivers 240 tokens per second. In latency-sensitive production environments, Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite provides faster time-to-first-token (TTFT) and higher streaming response velocity.

Can you implement a tiered LLM routing setup combining GPT-5.6 Luna and Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite to optimize costs?+

Yes! High-efficiency architectures route high-frequency routine classification and conversational tasks to GPT-5.6 Luna to save operational costs, and dynamically escalate complex architectural queries or reasoning tasks to Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite. This tiered routing pattern cuts overall API bills by up to 70%.

AI Terminology & Guide
Explore Glossary →

Understand key metrics like context window, token pricing, reasoning mode, and SWE-bench scores in our comprehensive AI glossary.

Les scores de benchmarks, tarifs par token et limites évoluent rapidement. Vérifiez toujours les spécifications actuelles sur la documentation officielle du fournisseur.

Sources: GetInfoUs Independent AI Benchmarks & Official API Specs