Gemini 2.5 Pro vs GPT-6 Luna
Compare Gemini 2.5 Pro and GPT-6 Luna side-by-side. See how these vision models stack up in Object Detection, Open Prompt, Classification, OCR, and Image Captioning.
Compare Gemini 2.5 Pro 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
Gemini 2.5 Pro vs GPT-6 Luna on Vision Evals
GPT-6 Luna scores higher on 3 of the five Vision Evals tasks.
The widest gap is Object Detection, where GPT-6 Luna leads 65.5% to 33.7%.
Overall, Gemini 2.5 Pro averages 57.6% (#38 of 61) against 69.7% (#19 of 61) for GPT-6 Luna.
GPT-6 Luna is cheaper ($0.0004 vs $0.0051 per sample), while Gemini 2.5 Pro is faster (6.8s vs 10.2s per sample).
Gemini 2.5 Pro vs GPT-6 Luna Comparison Table
Evals updated October 8, 2026Pricing updated October 10, 2026
| Property | Gemini 2.5 Pro | GPT-6 Luna |
|---|---|---|
| Organization | OpenAI | |
| Category | closed | closed |
| Modality | multimodal | multimodal |
| Release Date | Jun 2025 | Sep 2026 |
| Context Window | 1.0M | 1.1M |
| Parameters | Unknown | Unknown |
| License | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input $/1M | $1.25 | $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 | 57.6% | 69.7% |
| Avg cost / sample | $0.0051 | $0.0004 |
| Avg speed / sample | 6.83s | 10.21s |
| By task | ||
| Object Detection (low) | 33.7% | 65.5% ±0.4, Mean of 3 runs, range 65.2 to 66.0 |
| Object Detection (high) | – | 68.0% ±0.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 67.3 to 68.6 |
| Counting (low) | 52.7% | 71.6% ±0.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 71.6 to 71.6 |
| Counting (high) | – | 72.1% ±0.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 71.6 to 73.0 |
| Identification (low) | 93.8% | 87.5% ±3.1, Mean of 3 runs, range 84.4 to 90.6 |
| Identification (high) | – | 87.5% ±3.1, Mean of 3 runs, range 84.4 to 90.6 |
| OCR (low) | 65.2% | 59.8% |
| by category |
|
|
| OCR (high) | 64.6% | 62.5% |
| by category |
|
|
| Reasoning (low) | 42.4% | 64.2% ±3.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 60.3 to 66.2 |
| Reasoning (high) | 62.3% | 71.1% ±2.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 68.2 to 72.8 |
Gemini 2.5 Pro vs GPT-6 Luna: Overview
Gemini 2.5 Pro, released on June 17, 2025, is Google DeepMind’s most capable model in the Gemini 2.5 family, optimized for deep reasoning, coding, and complex multimodal tasks. It accepts text, images, audio, video, and PDFs as input and outputs text. The model supports 1 million input tokens with an output capacity of up to 65K tokens, enabling large-scale comprehension of datasets, codebases, and technical documents. Its training knowledge extends to January 2025.
Pro outperforms earlier Gemini 2.0 models across benchmarks, including agentic coding tasks where it achieved ~63.8% on SWE-Bench Verified. It supports structured outputs, function calling, code execution, search grounding, and URL context, making it well-suited for enterprise, STEM, and developer workflows. However, it does not currently support image or audio generation in its stable release, and its higher computational cost and latency make it less efficient than Flash or Flash-Lite. It is available via the Gemini API, Google AI Studio, and Vertex AI.
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 3 of the five vision tasks and averages 69.7% (#19 of 61) against 57.6% (#38 of 61) for Gemini 2.5 Pro. 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 33.7%. 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 $0.0051. Gemini 2.5 Pro is priced at $1.25 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.
Gemini 2.5 Pro is faster. Across Roboflow's Vision Evals it averaged 6.8s 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 object detection and open prompts in the free Roboflow Playground. You can try it instantly, and a free account unlocks unlimited runs.