Roboflow

Claude Opus 5 vs GPT-6 Luna

Compare Claude Opus 5 and GPT-6 Luna side-by-side.

Compare Claude Opus 5 vs GPT-6 Luna live

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

These models don't share enough common tasks for a side-by-side demo. See the comparison table below for their capabilities.

Models in this comparison

Anthropic

Claude Opus 5 vs GPT-6 Luna on Vision Evals

Claude Opus 5 scores higher on 5 of the six Vision Evals tasks.

The widest gap is Data Extraction, where Claude Opus 5 leads 89.7% to 68.0%.

Overall, Claude Opus 5 averages 78.3% (#16 of 57) against 68.6% (#32 of 57) for GPT-6 Luna.

GPT-6 Luna is cheaper ($0.0004 vs $0.017 per sample), while Claude Opus 5 is faster (7.4s vs 11.3s per sample).

Claude Opus 5GPT-6 Luna

Claude Opus 5 vs GPT-6 Luna Comparison Table

Evals updated September 22, 2026Pricing updated September 22, 2026

PropertyClaude Opus 5GPT-6 Luna
OrganizationAnthropicOpenAI
Categoryclosedclosed
Modalitymultimodalmultimodal
Release DateJul 2026Sep 2026
Context Window1.0M1.1M
Parameters
LicenseProprietaryProprietary
Pricing per 1M tokens
Input $/1M$5.00
Output $/1M$25.00
Vision Tasks
CaptioningDemo
Chart Question Answering
ClassificationDemo
Document Question Answering
Multi-Label Classification
Object DetectionDemo
OCRDemo
Vision Language
Visual Question AnsweringDemo
Image Tagging
Model Features
Foundation Vision
LLMs with Vision Capabilities
Multimodal Vision
Vision Evalsground-truth scores across 6 vision tasks, pooled at low effort
Overall
78.3%
68.6%
Avg cost / sample$0.017$0.0004
Avg speed / sample7.38s11.27s
By task
Object Detection (low)
54.4%
$0.027
56.8%
±1.9, Mean of 3 runs, range 54.8 to 58.5
$0.0006
Object Detection (high)
64.1%
±0.5, Mean of 3 runs, range 63.6 to 64.5
$0.0016
Counting (low)
70.3%
$0.0096
65.8%
±1.4, Mean of 3 runs, range 64.9 to 67.6
$0.0003
Counting (high)
64.4%
±2.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 62.2 to 66.2
$0.0006
Identification (low)
90.6%
$0.0072
81.3%
±0.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 81.3 to 81.3
$0.0002
Identification (high)
80.2%
±1.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 78.1 to 81.3
$0.0003
OCR (low)
93.2%
$0.020
87.9%
±0.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 87.2 to 88.3
$0.0005
OCR (high)
88.5%
±0.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 87.9 to 89.2
$0.0014
Data Extraction (low)
89.7%
$0.0080
68.0%
±3.1, Mean of 3 runs, range 65.0 to 71.1
$0.0002
Data Extraction (high)
66.7%
±0.5, Mean of 3 runs, range 66.0 to 67.0
$0.0004
Reasoning (low)
71.5%
$0.010
52.1%
±2.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 49.7 to 53.6
$0.0003
Reasoning (high)
74.2%
$0.018
60.7%
±1.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 58.9 to 62.3
$0.0006

Claude Opus 5 vs GPT-6 Luna: Overview

Claude Opus 5

Claude Opus 5 is a large language model with multimodal vision capabilities developed by Anthropic, released on July 24, 2026 as the fourth model in the Claude 5 family. It sits in the Opus tier of Anthropic's lineup, positioned below the Mythos-class Fable 5 and Mythos 5 models, and is framed by Anthropic as the go-to model for most knowledge work and automation tasks. The model approaches Fable 5's capabilities at roughly half the cost, priced at $5 per million input tokens and $25 per million output tokens. It becomes the default model on Claude Max and the strongest model available on Claude Pro. The model ships with a 1 million token context window and an adjustable "effort" parameter that allows users to trade reasoning depth for speed and token savings. Early enterprise customers reported that Opus 5 achieved comparable performance to Opus 4.8's maximum-reasoning mode while generating significantly fewer tokens on average, and demonstrated higher accuracy on financial modeling tasks with fewer tool calls and less time.

Claude Opus 5 supports multimodal inputs including images and text, and is designed for agentic workflows, coding, scientific research, and complex enterprise tasks. Anthropic reports the model scores 10.2 percentage points higher than Opus 4.8 on an internal chemistry benchmark, making it the most capable generally available model for scientific research in the Claude lineup. Cyber classifiers on Opus 5 are designed to intervene approximately 85 percent less often than those on Fable 5, with fallback to Opus 4.8 when a classifier triggers. The model does not retain user data for 30 days, unlike Fable 5. It is available across Anthropic's platforms including Claude Code and Claude Cowork, as well as cloud partners.

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, Claude Opus 5 performed better. It scores higher on 5 of the six vision tasks and averages 78.3% (#16 of 57) against 68.6% (#32 of 57) for GPT-6 Luna. These scores measure vision capabilities only; either model may perform differently on work outside this benchmark's tasks.

Yes. On the Vision Evals Data Extraction benchmark at low effort, Claude Opus 5 leads with 89.7% against 68.0%. 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 $0.017. Actual costs depend on your image sizes, prompts, and output length.

Claude Opus 5 is faster. Across Roboflow's Vision Evals it averaged 7.4s per inference against 11.3s. Latency varies with image size, prompt length, and provider load, so treat these as relative rather than guaranteed figures.