GPT-6 Luna vs Grok 4.5
Compare GPT-6 Luna and Grok 4.5 side-by-side.
Compare GPT-6 Luna vs Grok 4.5 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
GPT-6 Luna vs Grok 4.5 on Vision Evals
Grok 4.5 scores higher on 4 of the six Vision Evals tasks.
The widest gap is Object Detection, where GPT-6 Luna leads 56.8% to 19.0%.
Overall, GPT-6 Luna averages 68.6% (#32 of 57) against 65.8% (#40 of 57) for Grok 4.5.
GPT-6 Luna is both cheaper ($0.0004 vs $0.0084 per sample) and faster (11.3s vs 20.8s per sample).
GPT-6 Luna vs Grok 4.5 Comparison Table
Evals updated September 22, 2026Pricing updated September 22, 2026
| Property | GPT-6 Luna | Grok 4.5 |
|---|---|---|
| Organization | OpenAI | SpaceXAI |
| Category | closed | closed |
| Modality | multimodal | multimodal |
| Release Date | Sep 2026 | Jul 2026 |
| Context Window | 1.1M | 500K |
| Parameters | ||
| License | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input $/1M | $2.00 | |
| Output $/1M | $6.00 | |
| Vision Tasks | ||
| Captioning | Demo | |
| Chart Question Answering | ||
| Classification | Demo | |
| Document Question Answering | ||
| Image Tagging | ||
| Multi-Label Classification | ||
| Object Detection | Demo | |
| OCR | Demo | |
| Vision Language | ||
| Visual Question Answering | Demo | |
| Model Features | ||
| Foundation Vision | ||
| LLMs with Vision Capabilities | ||
| Multimodal Vision | ||
Vision Evalsground-truth scores across 6 vision tasks, pooled at low effort | ||
| Overall | 68.6% | 65.8% |
| Avg cost / sample | $0.0004 | $0.0084 |
| Avg speed / sample | 11.27s | 20.75s |
| By task | ||
| Object Detection (low) | 56.8% ±1.9, Mean of 3 runs, range 54.8 to 58.5 | 19.0% ±0.8, Mean of 3 runs, range 18.0 to 19.6 |
| Object Detection (high) | 64.1% ±0.5, Mean of 3 runs, range 63.6 to 64.5 | 17.8% ±0.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 17.5 to 18.0 |
| Counting (low) | 65.8% ±1.4, Mean of 3 runs, range 64.9 to 67.6 | 59.5% ±3.4, Mean of 3 runs, range 55.4 to 62.2 |
| Counting (high) | 64.4% ±2.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 62.2 to 66.2 | 57.7% ±3.4, Mean of 3 runs, range 54.0 to 60.8 |
| Identification (low) | 81.3% ±0.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 81.3 to 81.3 | 83.3% ±1.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 81.3 to 84.4 |
| Identification (high) | 80.2% ±1.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 78.1 to 81.3 | 85.4% ±3.1, Mean of 3 runs, range 81.3 to 87.5 |
| OCR (low) | 87.9% ±0.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 87.2 to 88.3 | 92.1% ±0.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 91.9 to 92.5 |
| OCR (high) | 88.5% ±0.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 87.9 to 89.2 | 92.3% ±0.5, Mean of 3 runs, range 91.9 to 92.9 |
| Data Extraction (low) | 68.0% ±3.1, Mean of 3 runs, range 65.0 to 71.1 | 83.5% ±1.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 81.4 to 84.5 |
| Data Extraction (high) | 66.7% ±0.5, Mean of 3 runs, range 66.0 to 67.0 | 81.8% ±1.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 80.4 to 83.5 |
| Reasoning (low) | 52.1% ±2.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 49.7 to 53.6 | 57.6% ±1.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 55.6 to 58.9 |
| Reasoning (high) | 60.7% ±1.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 58.9 to 62.3 | 59.8% ±2.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 57.0 to 62.3 |
GPT-6 Luna vs Grok 4.5: Overview
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.
Grok 4.5 is a proprietary reasoning model from SpaceXAI (xAI) that accepts interleaved text and image input and returns text, with a 500,000 token context window. xAI positions it as a model for coding, agentic software work, and knowledge tasks, and states it was trained in the company's Memphis data centers on datasets spanning science, engineering, and mathematics. Its reinforcement learning stage covers hundreds of thousands of multi step software engineering tasks scored by automated checks and model based grading, and training is reported to have run on tens of thousands of NVIDIA GB300 GPUs using an asynchronous scheme in which multi hour agentic rollouts continue while learning proceeds in parallel, targeting long horizon autonomous operation rather than single turn inference.
For vision, the model consumes JPEG and PNG images in any order relative to text prompts, covering visual question answering, description of chart and document imagery, and reading text rendered inside a scene. Reasoning effort is configurable, and the model supports function calling and structured outputs, so image inputs can be interleaved with tool calls inside agent loops. xAI has not published a technical report, architecture details, or parameter count, and reported mixture of experts sizing figures come from secondary coverage rather than official documentation.
Frequently Asked Questions
On Roboflow's Vision Evals, Grok 4.5 performed better. It scores higher on 4 of the six vision tasks and averages 65.8% (#40 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 Object Detection benchmark at low effort, GPT-6 Luna leads with 56.8% against 19.0%. 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 $0.0084. Actual costs depend on your image sizes, prompts, and output length.
GPT-6 Luna is faster. Across Roboflow's Vision Evals it averaged 11.3s per inference against 20.8s. Latency varies with image size, prompt length, and provider load, so treat these as relative rather than guaranteed figures.