Roboflow

Claude Opus 4.8 vs GPT-6 Luna

Compare Claude Opus 4.8 and GPT-6 Luna side-by-side. See how these vision models stack up in Image Captioning, Classification, OCR, Object Detection, and Open Prompt.

Compare Claude Opus 4.8 vs GPT-6 Luna live

Run the same image across every model that supports a task and compare their outputs side-by-side.

Detect and compare bounding boxes across models on the same image.

Open Object Detection in the full playground
AnthropicClaude Opus 4.8
Run to compare this model.
OpenAIGPT-6 Luna
Run to compare this model.

Models in this comparison

Claude Opus 4.8 vs GPT-6 Luna on Vision Evals

GPT-6 Luna scores higher on 4 of the five Vision Evals tasks.

The widest gap is Object Detection, where GPT-6 Luna leads 65.5% to 38.6%.

Overall, Claude Opus 4.8 averages 58.3% (#38 of 63) against 69.7% (#21 of 63) for GPT-6 Luna.

GPT-6 Luna is cheaper ($0.0004 vs $0.021 per sample), while Claude Opus 4.8 is faster (7.7s vs 10.2s per sample).

Claude Opus 4.8GPT-6 Luna

Claude Opus 4.8 vs GPT-6 Luna Comparison Table

Evals updated October 13, 2026Pricing updated October 16, 2026

PropertyClaude Opus 4.8GPT-6 Luna
OrganizationAnthropicOpenAI
Categoryclosedclosed
Modalitymultimodalmultimodal
Release DateMay 2026Sep 2026
Context Window1.0M1.1M
ParametersUnknownUnknown
LicenseProprietaryProprietary
Commercial usecommercial use per vendor termscommercial use per vendor terms
Pricing per 1M tokens
Input $/1M$5.00$0.100
Output $/1M$25.00$0.500
Vision Tasks
CaptioningDemoDemo
Chart Question AnsweringSupportedSupported
ClassificationDemoDemo
Document Question AnsweringSupportedSupported
Image TaggingSupportedSupported
Multi-Label ClassificationSupportedSupported
Object DetectionDemoDemo
OCRDemoDemo
Vision LanguageSupportedSupported
Visual Question AnsweringDemoDemo
Promptable Concept SegmentationNot listedDemo
Model Features
Foundation VisionSupportedSupported
LLMs with Vision CapabilitiesSupportedSupported
Multimodal VisionSupportedSupported
Vision Evalsground-truth scores across 5 vision tasks, pooled at low effort
Overall
58.3%
69.7%
Avg cost / sample$0.021$0.0004
Avg speed / sample7.66s10.21s
By task
Object Detection (low)
38.6%
$0.026
65.5%
±0.4, Mean of 3 runs, range 65.2 to 66.0
$0.0006
Object Detection (high)–
68.0%
±0.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 67.3 to 68.6
$0.0014
Counting (low)
54.0%
$0.0076
71.6%
±0.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 71.6 to 71.6
$0.0002
Counting (high)–
72.1%
±0.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 71.6 to 73.0
$0.0004
Identification (low)
84.4%
$0.0067
87.5%
±3.1, Mean of 3 runs, range 84.4 to 90.6
$0.0002
Identification (high)–
87.5%
±3.1, Mean of 3 runs, range 84.4 to 90.6
$0.0002
OCR (low)
61.5%
$0.025
59.8%
$0.0004
by category
Single value
53.0%
Transcription
70.8%
Structured JSON
82.4%
Text localization
24.2%
Single value
41.7%
Transcription
80.0%
Structured JSON
78.2%
Text localization
47.4%
OCR (high)
62.1%
$0.038
62.5%
$0.0013
by category
Single value
54.8%
Transcription
67.0%
Structured JSON
83.5%
Text localization
23.6%
Single value
44.4%
Transcription
84.0%
Structured JSON
81.0%
Text localization
50.0%
Reasoning (low)
53.0%
$0.0078
64.2%
±3.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 60.3 to 66.2
$0.0003
Reasoning (high)
52.3%
$0.0078
71.1%
±2.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 68.2 to 72.8
$0.0004

Claude Opus 4.8 vs GPT-6 Luna: Overview

Claude Opus 4.8

Claude Opus 4.8 is Anthropic's most capable generally available large language model, released on May 28, 2026 as an incremental upgrade to Claude Opus 4.7. The model accepts text and image inputs and produces text outputs, with a 1 million token context window on the Claude API, Amazon Bedrock, and Google Cloud Vertex AI (200k tokens on Microsoft Foundry) and up to 128k max output tokens. It uses adaptive thinking and supports adjustable effort tiers — high by default, with extra and max tiers available for more demanding tasks. A fast mode operates at approximately 2.5x standard speed. The model is described by Anthropic as a hybrid reasoning model designed for advanced coding, agentic workflows, long-context reasoning, and professional knowledge work.

Key behavioral improvements over Opus 4.7 include substantially reduced rates of unreported code flaws, improved honesty in self-assessment, and better tool-calling reliability. On Anthropic's Super-Agent benchmark, Opus 4.8 completes every case end-to-end, and it scores 84% on Online-Mind2Web for computer-use and browser-agent tasks. It achieves 88.6% on SWE-bench Verified and 69.2% on SWE-bench Pro. Alongside the model, Anthropic launched Dynamic Workflows in Claude Code (research preview), which enables Claude to orchestrate hundreds of parallel subagents for codebase-scale tasks such as large migrations. The Messages API was also updated to accept mid-task system messages without breaking prompt caching, improving support for long-running agentic pipelines.

GPT-6 Luna

GPT-6 Luna is the fast, cost-efficient tier of OpenAI's GPT-6 model family, sitting below GPT-6 Sol and the larger GPT-6 Astra model that opened the generation. It is a proprietary multimodal transformer that accepts text and image input and returns text, and it exposes an adjustable reasoning effort setting so the same model can run in a low-latency mode or spend additional inference compute on harder problems. OpenAI positions it for high-volume and latency-sensitive workloads such as conversational assistants, classification, and lightweight agentic pipelines, while noting that at higher reasoning effort it handles software engineering and computer-use tasks that previously required a Sol-tier model.

The model supports a context window of roughly 1,050,000 input tokens with a maximum output of 128,000 tokens, which allows long documents, extended agent traces, and large code repositories to be processed in a single request. OpenAI describes the GPT-6 generation as improving factual reliability and adopting a more concise communication style relative to the GPT-5.6 series, and attributes the efficiency of the Sol and Luna tiers to gains in caching and inference rather than to reduced capability. Architecture details, parameter counts, and training data are not published.

Frequently Asked Questions

On Roboflow's Vision Evals, GPT-6 Luna performed better. It scores higher on 4 of the five vision tasks and averages 69.7% (#21 of 63) against 58.3% (#38 of 63) for Claude Opus 4.8. These scores measure vision capabilities only; either model may perform differently on work outside this benchmark's tasks.

No. On the Vision Evals Object Detection benchmark at low effort, GPT-6 Luna leads with 65.5% against 38.6%. This is the widest gap between the two models across the benchmark's tasks.

GPT-6 Luna is cheaper to run. Across Roboflow's Vision Evals task mix it averaged $0.0004 per sample against $0.021. Claude Opus 4.8 is priced at $5.00 per 1M input tokens and $25.00 per 1M output; GPT-6 Luna is priced at $0.10 per 1M input tokens and $0.50 per 1M output. Actual costs depend on your image sizes, prompts, and output length.

Claude Opus 4.8 is faster. Across Roboflow's Vision Evals it averaged 7.7s per inference against 10.2s. Latency varies with image size, prompt length, and provider load, so treat these as relative rather than guaranteed figures.

Yes. The comparison demo on this page runs both models on the same image side by side for image captioning and image classification in the free Roboflow Playground. You can try it instantly, and a free account unlocks unlimited runs.