Claude Sonnet 5.5 vs GPT-6 Luna
Compare Claude Sonnet 5.5 and GPT-6 Luna side-by-side. See how these vision models stack up in Image Captioning, OCR, Classification, Object Detection, and Open Prompt.
Compare Claude Sonnet 5.5 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.
Upload an image
Drag and drop an image here, or click to browse
Models in this comparison
Claude Sonnet 5.5 vs GPT-6 Luna on Vision Evals
Claude Sonnet 5.5 scores higher on all five Vision Evals tasks.
The widest gap is Reasoning, where Claude Sonnet 5.5 leads 76.4% to 64.2%.
Overall, Claude Sonnet 5.5 averages 77.6% (#10 of 63) against 69.7% (#21 of 63) for GPT-6 Luna.
GPT-6 Luna is cheaper ($0.0004 vs $0.0073 per sample), while Claude Sonnet 5.5 is faster (8.3s vs 10.2s per sample).
Claude Sonnet 5.5 vs GPT-6 Luna Comparison Table
Evals updated October 13, 2026Pricing updated October 16, 2026
| Property | Claude Sonnet 5.5 | GPT-6 Luna |
|---|---|---|
| Organization | Anthropic | OpenAI |
| Category | closed | closed |
| Modality | multimodal | multimodal |
| Release Date | Sep 2026 | Sep 2026 |
| Context Window | 1.0M | 1.1M |
| Parameters | Unknown | Unknown |
| License | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Commercial use | commercial use per vendor terms | commercial use per vendor terms |
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input $/1M | $2.00 | $0.100 |
| Output $/1M | $10.00 | $0.500 |
| Vision Tasks | ||
| Captioning | Demo | Demo |
| Chart Question Answering | Supported | Supported |
| Classification | Demo | Demo |
| Document Question Answering | Supported | Supported |
| Image Tagging | Supported | Supported |
| Multi-Label Classification | Supported | Supported |
| Object Detection | Demo | Demo |
| OCR | Demo | Demo |
| Vision Language | Supported | Supported |
| Visual Question Answering | Demo | Demo |
| Promptable Concept Segmentation | Not listed | Demo |
| Model Features | ||
| Foundation Vision | Supported | Supported |
| LLMs with Vision Capabilities | Supported | Supported |
| Multimodal Vision | Supported | Supported |
Vision Evalsground-truth scores across 5 vision tasks, pooled at low effort | ||
| Overall | 77.6% | 69.7% |
| Avg cost / sample | $0.0073 | $0.0004 |
| Avg speed / sample | 8.33s | 10.21s |
| By task | ||
| Object Detection (low) | 74.3% ±0.9, Mean of 3 runs, range 73.5 to 75.3 | 65.5% ±0.4, Mean of 3 runs, range 65.2 to 66.0 |
| Object Detection (high) | 76.8% ±0.4, Mean of 3 runs, range 76.5 to 77.3 | 68.0% ±0.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 67.3 to 68.6 |
| Counting (low) | 79.3% ±0.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 78.4 to 79.7 | 71.6% ±0.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 71.6 to 71.6 |
| Counting (high) | 82.9% ±1.4, Mean of 3 runs, range 81.1 to 83.8 | 72.1% ±0.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 71.6 to 73.0 |
| Identification (low) | 91.7% ±3.1, Mean of 3 runs, range 87.5 to 93.8 | 87.5% ±3.1, Mean of 3 runs, range 84.4 to 90.6 |
| Identification (high) | 90.6% ±0.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 90.6 to 90.6 | 87.5% ±3.1, Mean of 3 runs, range 84.4 to 90.6 |
| OCR (low) | 66.3% | 59.8% |
| by category |
|
|
| OCR (high) | – | 62.5% |
| by category |
| |
| Reasoning (low) | 76.4% ±0.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 75.5 to 76.8 | 64.2% ±3.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 60.3 to 66.2 |
| Reasoning (high) | 83.9% ±1.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 82.1 to 85.4 | 71.1% ±2.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 68.2 to 72.8 |
Claude Sonnet 5.5 vs GPT-6 Luna: Overview
Claude Sonnet 5.5 is a proprietary multimodal language model from Anthropic and the second release in the Claude 5.5 family, following Claude Opus 5.5. It accepts interleaved text and image input and returns text, operating with a 1M token context window and a maximum output of 128K tokens per request. The model uses adaptive thinking by default, allocating variable reasoning effort per request rather than exposing a manual extended thinking toggle, and its training data cutoff is June 2026. Anthropic positions it as a faster, lower cost complement to Opus 5.5 for well scoped everyday tasks, bug fixing, and producing documents, slides, and spreadsheets.
On visual and agentic evaluations reported at launch, Sonnet 5.5 scores 61.6% on Chartography, a chart recognition test, compared with 15.6% for Claude Sonnet 5, and 80.1% on OSWorld 2.1, a computer use benchmark measuring screenshot driven control of a desktop environment, compared with 57.0% for Sonnet 5. It reports 70.6% on Terminal-Bench 4.0 for agentic coding. Anthropic describes it as the first Sonnet model able to complete Pokemon Red from screenshots alone, and it generates output more than 30% faster than Sonnet 5 while using fewer tokens for equivalent work.
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 Sonnet 5.5 performed better. It scores higher on all five vision tasks and averages 77.6% (#10 of 63) against 69.7% (#21 of 63) 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 Reasoning benchmark at low effort, Claude Sonnet 5.5 leads with 76.4% against 64.2%. 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 $0.0073. Claude Sonnet 5.5 is priced at $2.00 per 1M input tokens and $10.00 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 Sonnet 5.5 is faster. Across Roboflow's Vision Evals it averaged 8.3s 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 OCR in the free Roboflow Playground. You can try it instantly, and a free account unlocks unlimited runs.