Roboflow

GPT-6 Luna vs Qwen3.5 35B A3B

Compare GPT-6 Luna and Qwen3.5 35B A3B side-by-side.

Compare GPT-6 Luna vs Qwen3.5 35B A3B 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 Qwen3.5 35B A3B on Vision Evals

GPT-6 Luna scores higher on 4 of the six Vision Evals tasks.

The widest gap is Data Extraction, where Qwen3.5 35B A3B leads 83.5% to 68.0%.

Overall, GPT-6 Luna averages 68.6% (#32 of 57) against 69.4% (#28 of 57) for Qwen3.5 35B A3B.

GPT-6 Luna is both cheaper ($0.0004 vs $0.0016 per sample) and faster (11.3s vs 31.9s per sample).

GPT-6 LunaQwen3.5 35B A3B

GPT-6 Luna vs Qwen3.5 35B A3B Comparison Table

Evals updated September 22, 2026Pricing updated September 22, 2026

PropertyGPT-6 LunaQwen3.5 35B A3B
OrganizationOpenAIQwen
Categoryclosedopen
Modalitymultimodalmultimodal
Release DateSep 2026Feb 2026
Context Window1.1M262K
Parameters35B
LicenseProprietaryApache 2.0
Pricing per 1M tokens
Input $/1M$0.100$0.313
Output $/1M$0.500$1.25
Vision Tasks
CaptioningDemo
Chart Question Answering
Classification
Document Question Answering
Image Tagging
Multi-Label Classification
Object Detection
OCRDemo
Vision Language
Visual Question AnsweringDemo
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%
69.4%
Quantizationsself-hosted
FP869.0%GPTQ-INT469.4%hardware →
Avg cost / sample$0.0004$0.0016
Avg speed / sample11.27s31.88s
By task
Object Detection (low)
56.8%
±1.9, Mean of 3 runs, range 54.8 to 58.5
$0.0006
52.9%
±3.2, Mean of 3 runs, range 49.5 to 55.9
$0
Object Detection (high)
64.1%
±0.5, Mean of 3 runs, range 63.6 to 64.5
$0.0016
Counting (low)
65.8%
±1.4, Mean of 3 runs, range 64.9 to 67.6
$0.0003
62.6%
±2.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 60.8 to 64.9
$0
Counting (high)
64.4%
±2.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 62.2 to 66.2
$0.0006
Identification (low)
81.3%
±0.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 81.3 to 81.3
$0.0002
80.2%
±1.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 78.1 to 81.3
$0
Identification (high)
80.2%
±1.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 78.1 to 81.3
$0.0003
OCR (low)
87.9%
±0.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 87.2 to 88.3
$0.0005
83.0%
±0.4, Mean of 3 runs, range 82.7 to 83.5
$0
OCR (high)
88.5%
±0.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 87.9 to 89.2
$0.0014
Data Extraction (low)
68.0%
±3.1, Mean of 3 runs, range 65.0 to 71.1
$0.0002
83.5%
±2.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 80.4 to 85.6
$0
Data Extraction (high)
66.7%
±0.5, Mean of 3 runs, range 66.0 to 67.0
$0.0004
Reasoning (low)
52.1%
±2.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 49.7 to 53.6
$0.0003
54.1%
±0.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 53.6 to 54.3
$0
Reasoning (high)
60.7%
±1.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 58.9 to 62.3
$0.0006

GPT-6 Luna vs Qwen3.5 35B A3B: 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.

Qwen3.5 35B A3B

The Qwen3.5-35B-A3B is a native vision-language model developed by Alibaba Cloud’s Qwen team, released on February 24, 2026, as a high-efficiency entry in the Qwen 3.5 family. It utilizes a sophisticated hybrid architecture that integrates Gated Delta Networks with a sparse Mixture-of-Experts (MoE) system. While the model houses 35 billion total parameters, its routing mechanism activates only 8 routed experts and 1 shared expert per token, totaling approximately 3 billion active parameters. This design achieves cross-generational parity with the previous flagship Qwen3-235B dense model, delivering comparable reasoning and multimodal intelligence with significantly reduced inference latency and compute requirements. Available under the Apache 2.0 license, it is released in both base and instruction-tuned variants for seamless integration with open-source stacks like vLLM and Hugging Face Transformers.

Designed for the emerging era of agentic AI, the model utilizes a unified multimodal foundation built through early-fusion training. This approach allows it to outperform the prior Qwen3-VL series in spatial grounding, document analysis, and UI/GUI interaction. It features a native context window of 262,144 tokens, which is extensible up to 1,010,000 tokensvia RoPE scaling, and provides global support for 201 languages and dialects. This combination of a compact active parameter count and frontier-level visual comprehension makes it a versatile tool for developers requiring a balance of high-throughput speed and sophisticated visual reasoning for long-context workflows.

Frequently Asked Questions

On Roboflow's Vision Evals, GPT-6 Luna performed better. It scores higher on 4 of the six vision tasks and averages 68.6% (#32 of 57) against 69.4% (#28 of 57) for Qwen3.5 35B A3B. These scores measure vision capabilities only; either model may perform differently on work outside this benchmark's tasks.

No. On the Vision Evals Data Extraction benchmark at low effort, Qwen3.5 35B A3B leads with 83.5% against 68.0%. 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 $0.0016. 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 31.9s. Latency varies with image size, prompt length, and provider load, so treat these as relative rather than guaranteed figures.