Model comparison
GPT-5.6 Luna vs Holo3-35B-A3B
Head-to-head evidence from 0 shared benchmark results across 0 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: GPT-5.6 Luna #22 (Estimated); Holo3-35B-A3B unranked (Not scored). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. GPT-5.6 Luna and Holo3-35B-A3B share 0 comparable benchmark results. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 40 results are unique to GPT-5.6 Luna; 1 to Holo3-35B-A3B.
Updated July 18, 2026- Shared results
- 0
- GPT-5.6 Luna only
- 40
- Holo3-35B-A3B only
- 1
- Comparable categories
- 1 / 8
Treat this as a split decision. GPT-5.6 Luna makes more sense if agentic is the priority or you need the larger 1M context window; Holo3-35B-A3B is the better fit if you would rather avoid the extra latency and token burn of a reasoning model.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 0 shared benchmark results across 0 evidence categories; 1 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.
Why this result
GPT-5.6 Luna and Holo3-35B-A3B finish on the same BenchAlign overall score, so this is less about a single winner and more about where the edge shows up. The BenchAlign headline says tie; the benchmark table is where the real choice happens.
GPT-5.6 Luna is the reasoning model in the pair, while Holo3-35B-A3B is not. That usually helps on harder chain-of-thought-heavy tests, but it can also mean more latency and more token spend in real use. GPT-5.6 Luna gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 64K for Holo3-35B-A3B.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | GPT-5.6 Luna | Holo3-35B-A3B | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | GPT-5.6 Luna$1 input / $6 output | Holo3-35B-A3BNot available | A complete price comparison is not available. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | GPT-5.6 LunaNot available | Holo3-35B-A3BNot available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | GPT-5.6 LunaNot available | Holo3-35B-A3BNot available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | GPT-5.6 Luna1M | Holo3-35B-A3B64K | GPT-5.6 Luna lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
AgenticGPT-5.6 Luna wins15 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GPT-5.6 Luna | Holo3-35B-A3B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 84.7% | — | Not comparable |
| BrowseCompSource | 83.3% | — | Not comparable |
| OSWorld 2.0Source | 45.6% | — | Not comparable |
| CyberGymSource | 77.9% | — | Not comparable |
| ExploitGymSource | 12.4% | — | Not comparable |
| ToolathlonSource | 53.4% | — | Not comparable |
| AA Agentic IndexSource | 45.6% | — | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | 54.6% | — | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | 1592 | — | Not comparable |
| AA Harvey LABSource | 5.0% | — | Not comparable |
| AA ITBenchSource | 40.3% | — | Not comparable |
| AA Tau3 BankingSource | 27.2% | — | Not comparable |
| AA AutomationBenchSource | 42.2% | — | Not comparable |
| aaTerminalBench21Source | 80.9% | — | Not comparable |
| OSWorld-VerifiedSource | — | 82.6% | Not comparable |
Coding7 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GPT-5.6 Luna | Holo3-35B-A3B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench ProSource | 62.7% | — | Not comparable |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 84.7% | — | Not comparable |
| deepSweSource | 67.2% | — | Not comparable |
| FrontierCode 1.1 ExtendedSource | 55.1% | — | Not comparable |
| cursorBench32Source | 61.1% | — | Not comparable |
| AA Coding IndexSource | 71.5% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-SciCodeSource | 52.5% | — | Not comparable |
Reasoning3 benchmarks
Knowledge10 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GPT-5.6 Luna | Holo3-35B-A3B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQASource | 92.3% | — | Not comparable |
| GPQA-DSource | 92.3% | — | Not comparable |
| HealthBench ProfessionalSource | 55.7% | — | Not comparable |
| HealthBench HardSource | 32.0% | — | Not comparable |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 51.2% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 91.1% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-HLESource | 37.2% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | -11.2% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 41.5% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 90.1% | — | Not comparable |
Math3 benchmarks
Frequently Asked Questions (2)
Which is better, GPT-5.6 Luna or Holo3-35B-A3B?
GPT-5.6 Luna and Holo3-35B-A3B are tied on the BenchAlign overall score, so the right pick depends on which category matters most for your use case.
Which is better for agentic tasks, GPT-5.6 Luna or Holo3-35B-A3B?
GPT-5.6 Luna has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 84.1 versus 82.6. Holo3-35B-A3B stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.
Related Comparisons
Explore More
The AI models change fast. We track them for you.
A weekly brief for engineers and researchers covering new models, ranking shifts, and pricing changes.
Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.