Roboflow

GPT-6 Luna vs MiMo V2.6 Pro

Compare GPT-6 Luna and MiMo V2.6 Pro side-by-side. See how these vision models stack up in Image Captioning, OCR, Classification, Object Detection, and Open Prompt.

Compare GPT-6 Luna vs MiMo V2.6 Pro 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.

Open Object Detection in the full playground
OpenAIGPT-6 Luna
Run to compare this model.
MiMo V2.6 Pro
Run to compare this model.

Models in this comparison

GPT-6 Luna vs MiMo V2.6 Pro on Vision Evals

GPT-6 Luna scores higher on all five Vision Evals tasks.

The widest gap is Reasoning, where GPT-6 Luna leads 64.2% to 35.1%.

Overall, GPT-6 Luna averages 69.7% (#21 of 63) against 50.3% (#54 of 63) for MiMo V2.6 Pro.

GPT-6 Luna is cheaper ($0.0004 vs $0.0011 per sample), while MiMo V2.6 Pro is faster (9.5s vs 10.2s per sample).

GPT-6 LunaMiMo V2.6 Pro

GPT-6 Luna vs MiMo V2.6 Pro Comparison Table

Evals updated October 13, 2026Pricing updated October 16, 2026

PropertyGPT-6 LunaMiMo V2.6 Pro
OrganizationOpenAIXiaomi
Categoryclosedopen
Modalitymultimodalmultimodal
Release DateSep 2026Sep 2026
Context Window1.1M1.0M
ParametersUnknown1.02T total, 42B active
LicenseProprietaryMIT
Commercial usecommercial use per vendor termsfree for commercial use
Pricing per 1M tokens
Input $/1M$0.100$0.435
Output $/1M$0.500$0.870
Vision Tasks
CaptioningDemoDemo
Chart Question AnsweringSupportedSupported
ClassificationDemoDemo
Document Question AnsweringSupportedSupported
Image TaggingSupportedSupported
Multi-Label ClassificationSupportedSupported
Object DetectionDemoDemo
OCRDemoDemo
Vision LanguageSupportedSupported
Visual Question AnsweringDemoDemo
Promptable Concept SegmentationDemoNot listed
Model Features
Foundation VisionSupportedSupported
LLMs with Vision CapabilitiesSupportedSupported
Multimodal VisionSupportedSupported
Vision Evalsground-truth scores across 5 vision tasks, pooled at low effort
Overall
69.7%
50.3%
Avg cost / sample$0.0004$0.0011
Avg speed / sample10.21s9.45s
By task
Object Detection (low)
65.5%
±0.4, Mean of 3 runs, range 65.2 to 66.0
$0.0006
42.0%
±1.1, Mean of 3 runs, range 40.9 to 43.1
$0.0014
Object Detection (high)
68.0%
±0.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 67.3 to 68.6
$0.0014
46.7%
±0.8, Mean of 3 runs, range 45.7 to 47.3
$0.0030
Counting (low)
71.6%
±0.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 71.6 to 71.6
$0.0002
50.0%
±2.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 48.6 to 52.7
$0.0005
Counting (high)
72.1%
±0.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 71.6 to 73.0
$0.0004
59.0%
±5.4, Mean of 3 runs, range 52.7 to 63.5
$0.0016
Identification (low)
87.5%
±3.1, Mean of 3 runs, range 84.4 to 90.6
$0.0002
76.0%
±1.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 75.0 to 78.1
$0.0004
Identification (high)
87.5%
±3.1, Mean of 3 runs, range 84.4 to 90.6
$0.0002
78.1%
±4.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 71.9 to 81.3
$0.0012
OCR (low)
59.8%
$0.0004
48.6%
$0.0012
by category
Single value
41.7%
Transcription
80.0%
Structured JSON
78.2%
Text localization
47.4%
Single value
37.0%
Transcription
68.2%
Structured JSON
67.7%
Text localization
18.7%
OCR (high)
62.5%
$0.0013
49.9%
$0.0034
by category
Single value
44.4%
Transcription
84.0%
Structured JSON
81.0%
Text localization
50.0%
Single value
40.4%
Transcription
59.9%
Structured JSON
70.2%
Text localization
16.8%
Reasoning (low)
64.2%
±3.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 60.3 to 66.2
$0.0003
35.1%
±2.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 32.5 to 37.8
$0.0005
Reasoning (high)
71.1%
±2.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 68.2 to 72.8
$0.0004
55.9%
±2.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 54.3 to 58.9
$0.0026

GPT-6 Luna vs MiMo V2.6 Pro: Overview

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.

MiMo V2.6 Pro

MiMo V2.6 Pro is the flagship omni-modal foundation model in Xiaomi's MiMo V2.6 series, released as open weights alongside a Flash variant and a 9B distillation of Qwen3.5. It uses a sparse mixture-of-experts transformer with 1.02 trillion total parameters and roughly 42 billion activated per token, paired with a hybrid attention design that interleaves sliding-window and global attention layers to support a context window of about one million tokens. Dedicated encoders handle non-text inputs, including a vision encoder of roughly 681 million parameters and an audio tokenizer stack, so the model accepts text, images, video, and audio and returns text.

Post-training centers on large-scale reinforcement learning across thousands of interactive environments, combined with agentic grading, self-correction cold start, and a multi-prefix multi-teacher on-policy distillation stage that extends behavior to tasks that are hard to verify automatically. The resulting model targets long-horizon agentic work such as software engineering, terminal and computer-use operation, tool calling, cybersecurity analysis, and visual coding, and it reports gains over the prior MiMo generation on SWE-bench Verified, Terminal Bench, and internal visual coding and cyber benchmarks.

Frequently Asked Questions

On Roboflow's Vision Evals, GPT-6 Luna performed better. It scores higher on all five vision tasks and averages 69.7% (#21 of 63) against 50.3% (#54 of 63) for MiMo V2.6 Pro. 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-6 Luna leads with 64.2% against 35.1%. 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 $0.0011. GPT-6 Luna is priced at $0.10 per 1M input tokens and $0.50 per 1M output; MiMo V2.6 Pro is priced at $0.43 per 1M input tokens and $0.87 per 1M output. Actual costs depend on your image sizes, prompts, and output length.

MiMo V2.6 Pro is faster. Across Roboflow's Vision Evals it averaged 9.5s 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.