OpenAI GPT-5.6 Luna vs Qwen3.8 Flash

GPT-5.6 Luna has a slight edge on context and tooling; Qwen3.8 Flash is cheaper and supports video input.

Quick verdict

GPT-5.6 Luna is better for latency-sensitive agent and coding workflows. Qwen3.8 Flash is better for cost-sensitive multimodal and video intake.

Side-by-side comparison

FieldOpenAI GPT-5.6 LunaQwen3.8 Flash
ProviderOpenAIAlibaba
Context window1.05M tokens1M tokens
Input / 1M$0.200$0.150
Output / 1M$1.20$0.470
ModalitiesText, Vision, FilesText, Vision, Video
Best forBudget, Coding, AgentsBudget, Long Context, Multimodal

Cost estimates

WorkloadInputOutputOpenAI GPT-5.6 LunaQwen3.8 Flash
Quick test20,0005,000$0.010$0.005
Product chat month500,000125,000$0.250$0.134
Document batch5,000,0001,000,000$2.20$1.22

Estimates use list input/output prices and exclude cache discounts, provider surcharges and tool fees.

Choose OpenAI GPT-5.6 Luna if

  • You want long context with strong tool support
  • Your workload is lightweight agentic automation
  • Your tests favor OpenAI output stability
View OpenAI GPT-5.6 Luna on OpenRouter

Choose Qwen3.8 Flash if

  • You need video or image intake at low cost
  • Token volume is high and budget matters
  • Qwen meets your quality threshold in evaluation
View Qwen3.8 Flash on OpenRouter

FAQ

Is OpenAI GPT-5.6 Luna cheaper than Qwen3.8 Flash?

OpenAI GPT-5.6 Luna costs $0.200 input and $1.20 output per 1M tokens. Qwen3.8 Flash costs $0.150 input and $0.470 output per 1M tokens.

Which model has the larger context window?

OpenAI GPT-5.6 Luna offers 1.05M tokens; Qwen3.8 Flash offers 1M tokens. Provider-specific limits can vary by route.

Which one should I choose?

GPT-5.6 Luna is better for latency-sensitive agent and coding workflows. Qwen3.8 Flash is better for cost-sensitive multimodal and video intake.

Pricing and context data are based on a 2026-09-05 snapshot. Provider limits and pricing can change; verify on OpenRouter before production.