GPT-5.6 Luna vs Mistral Large 4
Compare GPT-5.6 Luna and Mistral Large 4 side-by-side. See how these vision models stack up in Classification, Image Captioning, OCR, Object Detection, and Open Prompt.
Compare GPT-5.6 Luna vs Mistral Large 4 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
GPT-5.6 Luna vs Mistral Large 4 on Vision Evals
GPT-5.6 Luna scores higher on 4 of the six Vision Evals tasks.
The widest gap is Reasoning, where GPT-5.6 Luna leads 60.5% to 38.9%.
Overall, GPT-5.6 Luna averages 73.8% (#24 of 61) against 68.5% (#36 of 61) for Mistral Large 4.
GPT-5.6 Luna is both cheaper ($0.0010 vs $0.0018 per sample) and faster (7.4s vs 8.8s per sample).
GPT-5.6 Luna vs Mistral Large 4 Comparison Table
Evals updated October 8, 2026Pricing updated October 8, 2026
| Property | GPT-5.6 Luna | Mistral Large 4 |
|---|---|---|
| Organization | OpenAI | Mistral |
| Category | closed | open |
| Modality | multimodal | multimodal |
| Release Date | Jul 2026 | Oct 2026 |
| Context Window | 1.5M | 1.0M |
| Parameters | Unknown | 1.05T total, 49B active |
| License | Proprietary | Custom |
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input $/1M | $0.200 | $0.680 |
| Output $/1M | $1.20 | $2.09 |
| 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 |
| Phrase Grounding | Not listed | Supported |
| Model Features | ||
| Foundation Vision | Supported | Supported |
| LLMs with Vision Capabilities | Supported | Supported |
| Multimodal Vision | Supported | Supported |
Vision Evalsground-truth scores across 6 vision tasks, pooled at low effort | ||
| Overall | 73.8% | 68.5% |
| Avg cost / sample | $0.0010 | $0.0018 |
| Avg speed / sample | 7.38s | 8.78s |
| By task | ||
| Object Detection (low) | 61.0% ±1.2, Mean of 3 runs, range 59.9 to 62.2 | 59.3% ±0.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 58.5 to 60.0 |
| Object Detection (high) | 62.3% ±1.2, Mean of 3 runs, range 61.4 to 63.8 | 50.2% ±2.5, Mean of 3 runs, range 48.0 to 53.0 |
| Counting (low) | 67.1% ±1.4, Mean of 3 runs, range 66.2 to 68.9 | 54.5% ±0.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 54.0 to 55.4 |
| Counting (high) | 70.7% ±3.4, Mean of 3 runs, range 66.2 to 73.0 | 63.1% ±2.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 60.8 to 64.9 |
| Identification (low) | 83.3% ±1.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 81.3 to 84.4 | 85.4% ±3.1, Mean of 3 runs, range 81.3 to 87.5 |
| Identification (high) | 84.4% ±6.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 78.1 to 90.6 | 85.4% ±1.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 84.4 to 87.5 |
| OCR (low) | 90.7% ±1.8, Mean of 3 runs, range 88.4 to 92.0 | 92.7% ±0.8, Mean of 3 runs, range 91.8 to 93.3 |
| OCR (high) | 91.5% ±0.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 91.2 to 91.7 | 87.1% ±4.4, Mean of 3 runs, range 81.6 to 90.4 |
| Data Extraction (low) | 80.4% ±2.1, Mean of 3 runs, range 78.3 to 82.5 | 80.1% ±1.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 79.4 to 81.4 |
| Data Extraction (high) | 81.8% ±0.5, Mean of 3 runs, range 81.4 to 82.5 | 82.5% ±1.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 81.4 to 83.5 |
| Reasoning (low) | 60.5% ±5.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 55.0 to 64.9 | 38.9% ±0.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 38.4 to 39.1 |
| Reasoning (high) | 65.6% ±3.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 60.9 to 68.2 | 57.6% ±2.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 55.6 to 59.6 |
GPT-5.6 Luna vs Mistral Large 4: Overview
GPT-5.6 Luna is the fastest and most cost-efficient model in OpenAI's GPT-5.6 family, which also includes Sol (the flagship tier) and Terra (the balanced mid-tier). Introduced under a new naming convention where the generation number (5.6) and a durable capability tier name (Luna, Terra, Sol) together define each model, Luna occupies the lightweight end of the family and is designed for high-volume, latency-sensitive workloads such as summarization, drafting, autocomplete, classification, and routine automation. The GPT-5.6 family as a whole advances capabilities in software engineering, computer use, professional knowledge work, scientific research, and cybersecurity, with all three tiers rated at the "High" capability level under OpenAI's Preparedness Framework for both cybersecurity and biological/chemical risk domains.
GPT-5.6 Luna supports multimodal input and function calling, and shares the family's 1.5 million token context window. On Terminal-Bench 2.1, Luna scores 82.5%, and on the Artificial Analysis Coding Agent Index it outperforms comparable models at roughly one-quarter the estimated cost of higher-tier alternatives. Luna supports the GPT-5.6 prompt caching scheme, which introduces explicit cache breakpoints and a 30-minute minimum cache life. The model was previewed on June 26, 2026 to a limited group of trusted partners via the OpenAI API and Codex, with general availability rolling out on July 9, 2026 across ChatGPT, Codex, and the API.
Mistral Large 4, nicknamed Le Chonk, is a natively multimodal mixture-of-experts model from Mistral that accepts interleaved text and image input and produces text output. It uses a granular MoE design with roughly 1.05 trillion total parameters and 49 billion active per token, reported as 52 billion when embeddings and output layers are counted, paired with a 1.6 billion parameter vision encoder and a context window of one million tokens. The model is trained from scratch on about 3,800 NVIDIA Grace Blackwell GPUs in Mistral's European data centers and supports more than 160 languages. It behaves as a hybrid instruct and reasoning system, with a reasoning effort setting that selects between direct answers and longer deliberation, alongside function calling and structured output for agentic workflows.
Image understanding is a focus of this generation, covering documents, charts, technical drawings and natural scenes, and the model emits bounding box coordinates for visual grounding queries. Reported grounding results include 42 percent on Dense200 and 73 percent on the DIOR-RSVG remote sensing benchmark. Mistral describes agentic vision workflows in which the model zooms into gigapixel satellite imagery or engineering drawings to verify details, and reports coding results such as 62 percent on DeepSWE. Figures published at preview time are preliminary because the reinforcement learning phase is still in progress.
Frequently Asked Questions
On Roboflow's Vision Evals, GPT-5.6 Luna performed better. It scores higher on 4 of the six vision tasks and averages 73.8% (#24 of 61) against 68.5% (#36 of 61) for Mistral Large 4. 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, GPT-5.6 Luna leads with 60.5% against 38.9%. This is the widest gap between the two models across the benchmark's tasks.
GPT-5.6 Luna is cheaper to run. Across Roboflow's Vision Evals task mix it averaged $0.0010 per sample against $0.0018. GPT-5.6 Luna is priced at $0.20 per 1M input tokens and $1.20 per 1M output; Mistral Large 4 is priced at $0.68 per 1M input tokens and $2.09 per 1M output. Actual costs depend on your image sizes, prompts, and output length.
GPT-5.6 Luna is faster. Across Roboflow's Vision Evals it averaged 7.4s per inference against 8.8s. 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 classification and image captioning in the free Roboflow Playground. You can try it instantly, and a free account unlocks unlimited runs.