Skip to main content
Radar

Keep up with the models you depend on. Follow price changes, retirements, and API updates.Follow the models you depend on.

Follow model changes
OpenAI logo
Model A
GPT-5.6 Luna

OpenAI

64.65/100

Estimated · Public rank #40

90% interval 58.970.4

GPT-5.6 Luna vs MiniCPM5-2B

Updated September 10, 2026. Public scores include evidence status and uncertainty. They are not guarantees for a specific workload.

OpenBMB logo
Model B
MiniCPM5-2B

OpenBMB

Evidence status unavailable

90% interval unavailable

Decision reading

At least one model is not scored in the current public ranking lane, so the page does not name an overall quality winner.

2 results are shared. Category rows resting on Estimated evidence or different benchmark sets are marked directional and do not name a winner.

Share or export

Share on XLinkedInSocial cardCSVJSON

Which one for your work

Recommendations appear only when a shared evidence basis or an explicit operating constraint supports the call. Secondary and unsupported use cases stay disclosed below the initial list.

  • Long documents

    Prompts that approach the documented context limit

    GPT-5.6 Luna

    GPT-5.6 Luna has the larger documented context window.

    Confidence: documented

Show secondary and unsupported calls
  • Coding work

    Code generation, repair, and software-engineering tasks

    Not enough matched evidence

    MiniCPM5-2B is not ranked on the public lane for coding, so no winner is named for coding.

    Confidence: limited

  • Agentic work

    Tool use, computer use, and multi-step task completion

    Not enough matched evidence

    MiniCPM5-2B is not ranked on the public lane for agentic, so no winner is named for agentic.

    Confidence: limited

  • Chat turn cost

    1K fresh input + 500 output tokens

    Not enough matched evidence

    A complete comparable API-rate estimate is not available for both models.

    Confidence: listed-rates

  • Cache-heavy agent loop cost

    200K cached + 20K fresh input + 10K output tokens

    Not enough matched evidence

    The page does not recommend a cost winner because at least one model cannot fit the stated workload in one request. MiniCPM5-2B does not fit this workload in one request. MiniCPM5-2B has no comparable published API token rate.

    Confidence: listed-rates

  • Repository review cost

    50K fresh input + 3K output tokens

    Not enough matched evidence

    A complete comparable API-rate estimate is not available for both models.

    Confidence: listed-rates

What is actually comparable

Shared results can support a head-to-head reading. Results present for only one model describe coverage, not superiority.

Shared results
2
GPT-5.6 Luna only
26
MiniCPM5-2B only
17
Like-for-like categories
0 / 8

Category results, on a stated basis

Each row shows the public-lane category score for both models: the BenchAlign lane for agentic, coding, and knowledge, and the weighted public rows elsewhere, with the same rank each model page reports. A row is like-for-like only when both scores rest on Supported evidence or the same weighted set. Directional and not-comparable rows remain visible, but they never receive a winner.

Agentic

Not comparable
GPT-5.6 Luna
56.8
Supported · #32/152
MiniCPM5-2B
Not ranked
Basis
BenchAlign lane · 8 vs 2 public rows
Reading
Not comparable

Coding

Not comparable
GPT-5.6 Luna
66.8
Supported · #9/151
MiniCPM5-2B
Not ranked
Basis
BenchAlign lane · 7 vs 5 public rows
Reading
Not comparable

Reasoning

Not comparable
GPT-5.6 Luna
51.2
#19/20
MiniCPM5-2B
Not ranked
Basis
Provisional lane · 2 vs 1 weighted rows
Reading
Not comparable

Knowledge

Not comparable
GPT-5.6 Luna
64.1
Supported · #27/183
MiniCPM5-2B
Not ranked
Basis
BenchAlign lane · 6 vs 5 public rows
Reading
Not comparable

Math

Not comparable
GPT-5.6 Luna
94.4
Unranked · 3 rankable rows
MiniCPM5-2B
Not ranked
Basis
Provisional lane · 2 vs 2 weighted rows
Reading
Not comparable

Multilingual

Not comparable
GPT-5.6 Luna
Not ranked
MiniCPM5-2B
Not ranked
Basis
Provisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows
Reading
Not comparable

Multimodal

Not comparable
GPT-5.6 Luna
67.1
#21/48
MiniCPM5-2B
Not ranked
Basis
Provisional lane · 1 vs 0 weighted rows
Reading
Not comparable

Instruction following

Not comparable
GPT-5.6 Luna
Not ranked
MiniCPM5-2B
Not ranked
Basis
Provisional lane · 0 vs 1 weighted rows
Reading
Not comparable

Ranks count the models scored in each category’s lane, so the agentic, coding, and knowledge denominators (BenchAlign) differ from the provisional-lane categories. Unranked scores sit on the lane’s scale but never name a winner. Like-for-like rows within 0.5 points read as a practical tie.

Shape of the matched evidence

Only shared public evidence is shown. Sparse evidence stays a ruled list rather than being closed into a radar shape.

Too few matched category axes support a radar. The ruled list below shows only shared benchmark results; positions use each benchmark’s normalized display scale when available.

What each workload costs

Three fixed token mixes turn per-token rates into comparable decisions. Each scenario states context fit and whether cached input had to fall back to the published list-input rate.

Chat turn

1K fresh input + 500 output tokens

GPT-5.6 Luna
$0.004
Fits in one request
MiniCPM5-2B
Self-hosted; infrastructure cost varies
Fits in one request

MiniCPM5-2B has no comparable published API token rate.

Repository review

50K fresh input + 3K output tokens

GPT-5.6 Luna
$0.068
Fits in one request
MiniCPM5-2B
Self-hosted; infrastructure cost varies
Fits in one request

MiniCPM5-2B has no comparable published API token rate.

Cache-heavy agent loop

200K cached + 20K fresh input + 10K output tokens

GPT-5.6 Luna
$0.1
Fits in one request
MiniCPM5-2B
Self-hosted; infrastructure cost varies
Does not fit in one request
Cached-input rate unavailable

MiniCPM5-2B does not fit this workload in one request. MiniCPM5-2B has no comparable published API token rate.

Specification differences

Sourced differences are shown directly. Missing facts stay explicit instead of being inferred from a model name or family.

Cached-input rate

A missing cached-input rate falls back to the listed input rate only in the stated workload estimate.

GPT-5.6 Luna

$0.1 per 1M cached input tokens

OpenAI API pricing

MiniCPM5-2B

No comparable hosted API rate

OpenBMB MiniCPM5-2B model card

Provider availability

GPT-5.6 Luna

Generally Available · OpenAI Responses API

OpenAI model catalog

MiniCPM5-2B

Not sourced

Reasoning profile

GPT-5.6 Luna

Reasoning

MiniCPM5-2B

Reasoning

Weight access

GPT-5.6 Luna

Proprietary

MiniCPM5-2B

Open Weight

License

GPT-5.6 Luna

Proprietary

MiniCPM5-2B

Open Weight

Release date

GPT-5.6 Luna

2026-07-09

MiniCPM5-2B

2026-09-06

If you already use one of these models
Deployment change
The models list different providers, so authentication, endpoint behavior, limits, and feature support may change.
Quality signal
At least one model is not scored in the current public ranking lane, so the page does not name an overall quality winner.
Workload cost
A complete comparable API-rate estimate is not available for both models.
Context tradeoff
GPT-5.6 Luna has the larger documented window (1.05M).

Run the same representative tasks against both endpoints before changing production traffic.

Benchmark evidence

The full public result ledger is available for audit without forcing a wide desktop table onto a phone.

Browse raw public benchmark evidence45 rows

Agentic

  • Terminal-Bench 3.0

    GPT-5.6 Luna14.3%
    Source
    MiniCPM5-2B

    Not directly comparable

  • Terminal-Bench 2.0

    GPT-5.6 Luna84.7%
    Source
    MiniCPM5-2B

    Not directly comparable

  • BrowseComp

    GPT-5.6 Luna83.3%
    Source
    MiniCPM5-2B

    Not directly comparable

  • OSWorld 2.0

    GPT-5.6 Luna45.6%
    Source
    MiniCPM5-2B

    Not directly comparable

  • CyberGym

    GPT-5.6 Luna77.9%
    Source
    MiniCPM5-2B

    Not directly comparable

  • ExploitGym

    GPT-5.6 Luna12.4%
    Source
    MiniCPM5-2B

    Not directly comparable

  • Toolathlon

    GPT-5.6 Luna53.4%
    Source
    MiniCPM5-2B

    Not directly comparable

  • Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals)

    GPT-5.6 Luna79.0%
    Source
    MiniCPM5-2B

    Not directly comparable

  • BFCL v4

    GPT-5.6 Luna
    MiniCPM5-2B66.6%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • Terminal-Bench 2.1

    GPT-5.6 Luna
    MiniCPM5-2B8.6%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Coding

  • SWE-bench Pro

    GPT-5.6 Luna62.7%
    Source
    MiniCPM5-2B14.4%
    Source

    GPT-5.6 Luna leads this result

  • Terminal-Bench 2.0

    GPT-5.6 Luna84.7%
    Source
    MiniCPM5-2B

    Not directly comparable

  • DeepSWE

    GPT-5.6 Luna67.2%
    Source
    MiniCPM5-2B

    Not directly comparable

  • FrontierCode 1.1 Extended

    GPT-5.6 Luna55.1%
    Source
    MiniCPM5-2B

    Not directly comparable

  • cursorBench32

    GPT-5.6 Luna61.1%
    Source
    MiniCPM5-2B

    Not directly comparable

  • VulcanBench v3

    GPT-5.6 Luna85.5%
    Source
    MiniCPM5-2B

    Not directly comparable

  • SWE-bench (Vals)

    GPT-5.6 Luna93.0%
    Source
    MiniCPM5-2B

    Not directly comparable

  • LiveCodeBench v6

    GPT-5.6 Luna
    MiniCPM5-2B69.1%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • SciCode

    GPT-5.6 Luna
    MiniCPM5-2B26.3%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • SWE-bench Verified

    GPT-5.6 Luna
    MiniCPM5-2B46.4%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • Terminal-Bench 2.1

    GPT-5.6 Luna
    MiniCPM5-2B8.6%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Reasoning

  • ARC-AGI-2

    GPT-5.6 Luna59.5%
    Source
    MiniCPM5-2B

    Not directly comparable

  • ARC-AGI-3

    GPT-5.6 Luna0.2%
    Source
    MiniCPM5-2B

    Not directly comparable

  • LongBench v2

    GPT-5.6 Luna
    MiniCPM5-2B43.7%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Knowledge

  • GPQA

    GPT-5.6 Luna92.3%
    Source
    MiniCPM5-2B

    Not directly comparable

  • GPQA-D

    GPT-5.6 Luna92.3%
    Source
    MiniCPM5-2B70.2%
    Source

    GPT-5.6 Luna leads this result

  • HealthBench Professional

    GPT-5.6 Luna55.7%
    Source
    MiniCPM5-2B

    Not directly comparable

  • HealthBench Hard

    GPT-5.6 Luna32.0%
    Source
    MiniCPM5-2B

    Not directly comparable

  • GPQA Diamond (Vals)

    GPT-5.6 Luna91.7%
    Source
    MiniCPM5-2B

    Not directly comparable

  • MMLU-Pro (Vals)

    GPT-5.6 Luna86.0%
    Source
    MiniCPM5-2B

    Not directly comparable

  • MMLU-Pro

    GPT-5.6 Luna
    MiniCPM5-2B70.8%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • MMLU-Redux

    GPT-5.6 Luna
    MiniCPM5-2B84.7%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • HLE

    GPT-5.6 Luna
    MiniCPM5-2B8.9%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • SuperGPQA

    GPT-5.6 Luna
    MiniCPM5-2B40.8%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Math

  • FrontierMath (legacy)

    GPT-5.6 Luna78.6%
    Source
    MiniCPM5-2B

    Not directly comparable

  • FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)

    GPT-5.6 Luna78.600%
    Source
    MiniCPM5-2B

    Not directly comparable

  • FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)

    GPT-5.6 Luna58.500%
    Source
    MiniCPM5-2B

    Not directly comparable

  • AIME 2025

    GPT-5.6 Luna
    MiniCPM5-2B86.5%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • AIME26

    GPT-5.6 Luna
    MiniCPM5-2B86.5%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • HMMT Feb 2026

    GPT-5.6 Luna
    MiniCPM5-2B63.8%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • MATH-500

    GPT-5.6 Luna
    MiniCPM5-2B94.6%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Multimodal

  • MMMU-Pro

    GPT-5.6 Luna78.4%
    Source
    MiniCPM5-2B

    Not directly comparable

  • MMMU-Pro w/ Python

    GPT-5.6 Luna79.5%
    Source
    MiniCPM5-2B

    Not directly comparable

Instruction following

  • IFBench

    GPT-5.6 Luna
    MiniCPM5-2B66.3%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • IFEval

    GPT-5.6 Luna
    MiniCPM5-2B86.7%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Frequently asked questions

Which is better, GPT-5.6 Luna or MiniCPM5-2B?

At least one model is not scored in the current public ranking lane, so the page does not name an overall quality winner. The page therefore keeps the decision tied to the specific documented workload.

Which is better for coding, GPT-5.6 Luna or MiniCPM5-2B?

MiniCPM5-2B is not ranked on the public lane for coding, so no winner is named for coding.

Which is better for agentic tasks, GPT-5.6 Luna or MiniCPM5-2B?

MiniCPM5-2B is not ranked on the public lane for agentic tasks, so no winner is named for agentic tasks.

Which costs less, GPT-5.6 Luna or MiniCPM5-2B?

Both models do not have comparable published API token rates, so this page does not name a universal price winner.

Which has the larger context window, GPT-5.6 Luna or MiniCPM5-2B?

GPT-5.6 Luna has the larger documented context window: 1.05M, compared with 131K.

Related comparisons

Last updated September 10, 2026

Watch GPT-5.6 Luna vs MiniCPM5-2B

One weekly email when material rank, price, or benchmark evidence changes make this matchup worth revisiting.

Read a sample issue

Join 2,000+ readers.