Compare Claude Opus 5.5 (Anthropic) and GPT‑6 Luna (OpenAI) by price, context, capabilities, and latency.
Side by side
Compare price, provider, context, capabilities, latency, and source basis.
| Model | Provider | Input | Output | Context | Capabilities | Best for | Latency | Status | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Opus 5.5anthropic/claude-opus-5.5 | Anthropic | $4 / 1M tokens | $20 / 1M tokens | 1M | StreamingTool callingJSON modeVision | image understanding, multimodal chat | 1845-5119ms | Catalog | Platform curated |
| GPT‑6 Lunaopenai/gpt-6-luna | OpenAI | Starting at $0.1 / 1M tokens | $0.5 / 1M tokens | 1M | StreamingTool callingJSON modeVision | image understanding, multimodal chat | 1722-2681ms | Catalog | Platform curated |
FAQ
GPT‑6 Luna is cheaper ($0.1 / 1M tokens input / $0.5 / 1M tokens output) vs Claude Opus 5.5 ($4 / 1M tokens input / $20 / 1M tokens output). Actual cost depends on your input/output token mix — estimate it with the pricing calculator.
Both offer the same context window: 1M tokens.
Both target Vision. Pick GPT‑6 Luna to optimize cost, or Claude Opus 5.5 for the longer context window. Test both on real prompts before committing production traffic.
Related comparisons