Skip to main content
BenchLM
Data

GPT-6 Astra vs GPT-6 Luna

Updated November 6, 2026. Rank says GPT-6 Astra is ahead. Price, access, and your workload can each overturn that. Public scores include evidence status and uncertainty. This is a same-family comparison, so migration details appear when the source data supports them.

Share or export
Share on XLinkedInAPI/MCP

Decision reading

GPT-6 Astra has the higher public score, 85.8 versus 62.59, and the 90% score intervals do not overlap. 22 results are shared. Category rows resting on Estimated evidence or different benchmark sets are marked directional and do not name a winner.

Model A
OpenAI logo

OpenAI

85.8/100

Supported · Public rank #3

90% interval 80.2–91.4

Model B
OpenAI logo

OpenAI

62.59/100

Supported · Public rank #43

90% interval 52.0–73.2

Shared results
22
GPT-6 Astra only
27
GPT-6 Luna only
1
Like-for-like categories
3 / 8
Supported: GPT-6 Astra and GPT-6 LunaHow the comparison works

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.

  • Coding work

    Code generation, repair, and software-engineering tasks

    GPT-6 Astra

    GPT-6 Astra has the higher public coding point estimate, 74.8 to 51.8, with Supported evidence for both models. The conditional ranges do not establish rank confidence.

    Confidence: limited
  • Chat turn cost

    1K fresh input + 500 output tokens

    GPT-6 Luna

    GPT-6 Luna has the lower estimated token cost for this stated workload. Costs use the listed standard API rates.

    Confidence: listed-rates
  • Cache-heavy agent loop cost

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

    GPT-6 Luna

    GPT-6 Luna has the lower estimated token cost for this stated workload. Costs use the listed standard API rates.

    Confidence: listed-rates
Show secondary and unsupported calls
  • Repository review cost

    50K fresh input + 3K output tokens

    GPT-6 Luna

    GPT-6 Luna has the lower estimated token cost for this stated workload. Costs use the listed standard API rates.

    Confidence: listed-rates
  • Agentic work

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

    Not enough matched evidence

    GPT-6 Luna is scored on Estimated evidence for agentic, so the reading is directional rather than like-for-like.

    Confidence: limited
  • Long documents

    Prompts that approach the documented context limit

    No clear pick

    The documented context windows are equal.

    Confidence: documented

Which one for a specific job

Choose a job from the LLM Selector's task catalog to see the category row it rests on, under the same basis rules as the table below. A directional row stays directional; choosing a job never creates a winner.

The same task catalog as the LLM Selector. Each job names the evidence surface it rests on; nothing here adds a new score.

74.8GPT-6 Astra51.8GPT-6 Luna

Like-for-like · BenchAlign v5.8

GPT-6 Astra has the higher coding point estimate. Conditional score ranges do not establish rank confidence.

Coding scores combine specific tasks and setups. Match the editor, harness, and effort to your workflow.

Same basis rules as the category table below

What is actually comparable

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

1 category rests on Estimated evidence or different evidence sets. Those rows remain visible for coverage context but do not name a winner.

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.

Bars run 0–100 on each benchmark’s normalized display scale

Category results, on a stated basis

Each row shows the public-lane category score for both models: the BenchAlign v5.8 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.

Coding

Like-for-like
GPT-6 Astra
74.8
Supported · #5/157
GPT-6 Luna
51.8
Supported · #42/157
Basis
BenchAlign v5.8 lane · 8 vs 3 public rows
Reading
GPT-6 Astra leads

Reasoning

Like-for-like
GPT-6 Astra
91.6
#1/25
GPT-6 Luna
57.5
#22/25
Basis
Provisional lane · 2 vs 2 weighted rows
Reading
GPT-6 Astra leads

Knowledge

Like-for-like
GPT-6 Astra
85.5
Supported · #4/178
GPT-6 Luna
63.3
Supported · #40/178
Basis
BenchAlign v5.8 lane · 7 vs 5 public rows
Reading
GPT-6 Astra leads

Agentic

Directional only
GPT-6 Astra
73.3
Supported · #8/131
GPT-6 Luna
53.5
Estimated · #45/131
Basis
BenchAlign v5.8 lane · 16 vs 5 public rows
Reading
Directional only

Multimodal

Not comparable
GPT-6 Astra
88.0
Unranked · 3 rankable rows
GPT-6 Luna
81.9
Unranked · 1 rankable row
Basis
Provisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows
Reading
Not comparable

Multilingual

Not comparable
GPT-6 Astra
Not ranked
GPT-6 Luna
Not ranked
Basis
Provisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows
Reading
Not comparable

Instruction following

Not comparable
GPT-6 Astra
Not ranked
GPT-6 Luna
Not ranked
Basis
Provisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows
Reading
Not comparable

Math

Not comparable
GPT-6 Astra
93.8
Unranked · 2 rankable rows
GPT-6 Luna
80.2
Unranked · 2 rankable rows
Basis
Provisional lane · 2 vs 2 weighted rows
Reading
Not comparable

Ranks count the models scored in each category’s lane, so the agentic, coding, and knowledge denominators (BenchAlign v5.8) differ from the provisional-lane categories. Unranked scores sit on the provisional lane’s scale but never name a winner. Like-for-like rows within 0.5 points read as a practical tie.

Supported evidence per lane · bars run 0–100Methodology

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-6 Astra
$0.035
Fits in one request
GPT-6 Luna
$0.00035
Fits in one request

GPT-6 Luna has the lower modeled cost

Costs use the listed standard API rates.

Repository review

50K fresh input + 3K output tokens

GPT-6 Astra
$0.65
Fits in one request
GPT-6 Luna
$0.0065
Fits in one request

GPT-6 Luna has the lower modeled cost

Costs use the listed standard API rates.

Cache-heavy agent loop

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

GPT-6 Astra
$0.9
Fits in one request
GPT-6 Luna
$0.009
Fits in one request

GPT-6 Luna has the lower modeled cost

Costs use the listed standard API rates.

Cached input falls back to the list input rate only where a cached rate is unpublished

Specification differences

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

Provider availability

GPT-6 Astra

Limited Availability · OpenAI Responses API, OpenAI Chat Completions API, ChatGPT Plus, Pro, Business, and Enterprise, Microsoft Azure, AWS Bedrock

OpenAI GPT-6 Astra model documentation

GPT-6 Luna

Generally Available · OpenAI Responses API, OpenAI Chat Completions API, ChatGPT Work, Codex

OpenAI GPT-6 Sol and Luna launch

Reasoning profile

GPT-6 Astra

Reasoning

GPT-6 Luna

Reasoning

Weight access

GPT-6 Astra

Proprietary

GPT-6 Luna

Proprietary

License

GPT-6 Astra

Proprietary

GPT-6 Luna

Proprietary

Release date

GPT-6 Astra

2026-09-03

GPT-6 Luna

2026-09-22

If you are choosing between sibling variants

Deployment change
Both entries list OpenAI as the provider. Confirm endpoint, model ID, limits, and feature support before switching.
Quality signal
GPT-6 Astra has the higher public score, 85.8 versus 62.59, and the 90% score intervals do not overlap.
Workload cost
Repository review: $0.65 vs $0.0065. Cache-heavy agent loop: $0.9 vs $0.009.
Context tradeoff
Both models list 1.05M.
Run the same representative tasks against both endpoints before changing production traffic.

Questions

Which is better, GPT-6 Astra or GPT-6 Luna?

GPT-6 Astra has the higher public score, 85.8 versus 62.59, and the 90% score intervals do not overlap. That is the clearest overall quality signal in the current public data.

Which is better for coding, GPT-6 Astra or GPT-6 Luna?

GPT-6 Astra has the higher public coding point estimate, 74.8 to 51.8, with Supported evidence for both models. The conditional ranges do not establish rank confidence.

Which is better for agentic tasks, GPT-6 Astra or GPT-6 Luna?

GPT-6 Astra scores higher for agentic tasks on the public lane, 73.3 to 53.5. GPT-6 Luna is scored on Estimated evidence for agentic tasks, so the reading is directional rather than like-for-like. BenchLM does not name a winner for agentic tasks from a directional reading; read the shared benchmark rows directly and test the models on the same task set.

Which costs less, GPT-6 Astra or GPT-6 Luna?

For the stated presets, chat costs $0.035 on GPT-6 Astra and $0.00035 on GPT-6 Luna; repository review costs $0.65 and $0.0065; the cache-heavy agent loop costs $0.9 and $0.009. Costs use the listed standard API rates.

Which has the larger context window, GPT-6 Astra or GPT-6 Luna?

Both models list the same context window, 1.05M.

Benchmark evidence

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

Browse raw public benchmark evidence50 rows

Agentic

  • LifeVal

    GPT-6 Astra80.6%
    Source
    GPT-6 Luna—

    Not directly comparable

  • BrowseComp

    GPT-6 Astra91.5%
    Source
    GPT-6 Luna—

    Not directly comparable

  • OSWorld 2.0

    GPT-6 Astra72.6%
    Source
    GPT-6 Luna—

    Not directly comparable

  • Terminal-Bench 4.0

    GPT-6 Astra57.90%
    Source
    GPT-6 Luna—

    Not directly comparable

  • Terminal-Bench-Science 0.1

    GPT-6 Astra64.6%
    Source
    GPT-6 Luna—

    Not directly comparable

  • ExploitGym

    GPT-6 Astra42.4%
    Source
    GPT-6 Luna11.6%
    Source

    GPT-6 Astra leads this result

  • Agents' Last Exam

    GPT-6 Astra59.3%
    Source
    GPT-6 Luna—

    Not directly comparable

  • AutomationBench

    GPT-6 Astra41.4%
    Source
    GPT-6 Luna—

    Not directly comparable

  • HLE w/ tools

    GPT-6 Astra57.2%
    Source
    GPT-6 Luna—

    Not directly comparable

  • Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals)

    GPT-6 Astra87.3%
    Source
    GPT-6 Luna—

    Not directly comparable

  • ApprenticeBench

    GPT-6 Astra68%
    Source
    GPT-6 Luna—

    Not directly comparable

  • CWE-bench v1

    GPT-6 Astra68.0%
    Source
    GPT-6 Luna—

    Not directly comparable

  • Hermes Index

    Shared source
    GPT-6 Astra56.3%
    GPT-6 Luna33.9%

    GPT-6 Astra leads this result

  • Hermes Bench

    Shared source
    GPT-6 Astra73.7%
    GPT-6 Luna70.5%

    GPT-6 Astra leads this result

  • MazeBench

    GPT-6 Astra23%
    Source
    GPT-6 Luna0%
    Source

    GPT-6 Astra leads this result

  • OSWorld 2.1

    GPT-6 Astra75.8%
    Source
    GPT-6 Luna—

    Not directly comparable

  • OSWorld 2.1 Offline

    GPT-6 Astra—
    GPT-6 Luna48.9%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Coding

  • ScarfBench

    GPT-6 Astra65.4%
    Source
    GPT-6 Luna—

    Not directly comparable

  • DeepSWE

    GPT-6 Astra74.1%
    Source
    GPT-6 Luna66.6%
    Source

    GPT-6 Astra leads this result

  • FrontierCode 1.1 Main

    GPT-6 Astra53.3%
    Source
    GPT-6 Luna—

    Not directly comparable

  • FrontierCode 1.1 Extended

    GPT-6 Astra64.5%
    Source
    GPT-6 Luna—

    Not directly comparable

  • FrontierSWE v2

    GPT-6 Astra65.5%
    Source
    GPT-6 Luna—

    Not directly comparable

  • PostTrainBench v1.1

    GPT-6 Astra44.3%
    Source
    GPT-6 Luna—

    Not directly comparable

  • Bug Hunt Bench

    Shared source
    GPT-6 Astra45.0 fixes
    GPT-6 Luna18.3 fixes

    GPT-6 Astra leads this result

  • FrontierCode 2.0

    Shared source
    GPT-6 Astra42.8%
    GPT-6 Luna21.9%

    GPT-6 Astra leads this result

Reasoning

  • BioBasicsBench

    Shared source
    GPT-6 Astra67.0%
    GPT-6 Luna37.6%

    GPT-6 Astra leads this result

  • STEMBench

    GPT-6 Astra2.81
    Source
    GPT-6 Luna—

    Not directly comparable

  • ARC-AGI-1

    GPT-6 Astra97.50%
    Source
    GPT-6 Luna86.67%
    Source

    GPT-6 Astra leads this result

  • ARC-AGI-2

    GPT-6 Astra95%
    Source
    GPT-6 Luna59.3%
    Source

    GPT-6 Astra leads this result

  • ARC-AGI-3

    GPT-6 Astra62.7%
    Source
    GPT-6 Luna0.1%
    Source

    GPT-6 Astra leads this result

  • GeneBench-Pro

    GPT-6 Astra37.8%
    Source
    GPT-6 Luna—

    Not directly comparable

  • MRCR v2 256K-512K

    GPT-6 Astra100.0%
    Source
    GPT-6 Luna—

    Not directly comparable

  • MRCR v2 512K-1M

    GPT-6 Astra96.3%
    Source
    GPT-6 Luna—

    Not directly comparable

  • GraphWalks BFS 256K–1M

    GPT-6 Astra71.8%
    Source
    GPT-6 Luna—

    Not directly comparable

  • ARC-AGI-3 Provider Adapter

    GPT-6 Astra98.55%
    Source
    GPT-6 Luna0.59%
    Source

    GPT-6 Astra leads this result

Multimodal

  • ExtractBench Pro

    Shared source
    GPT-6 Astra58%
    GPT-6 Luna0%

    GPT-6 Astra leads this result

  • ExtractBench (LlamaIndex)

    Shared source
    GPT-6 Astra91.91%
    GPT-6 Luna91.01%

    GPT-6 Astra leads this result

  • ParseBench

    Shared source
    GPT-6 Astra69.81%
    GPT-6 Luna64.13%

    GPT-6 Astra leads this result

  • ScreenSpot Pro

    GPT-6 Astra92.7%
    Source
    GPT-6 Luna—

    Not directly comparable

  • BenchCAD Vision2Code (tools)

    GPT-6 Astra0.959
    Source
    GPT-6 Luna—

    Not directly comparable

Knowledge

  • GPQA

    GPT-6 Astra96%
    Source
    GPT-6 Luna—

    Not directly comparable

  • GPQA-D

    GPT-6 Astra96.0%
    Source
    GPT-6 Luna—

    Not directly comparable

  • HealthBench (raw)

    Shared source
    GPT-6 Astra56.9%
    GPT-6 Luna50.0%

    GPT-6 Astra leads this result

  • HealthBench (length-adjusted)

    Shared source
    GPT-6 Astra58.3%
    GPT-6 Luna54.5%

    GPT-6 Astra leads this result

  • HealthBench Professional

    Shared source
    GPT-6 Astra64.7%
    GPT-6 Luna60.8%

    GPT-6 Astra leads this result

  • HealthBench Professional (raw)

    Shared source
    GPT-6 Astra68.2%
    GPT-6 Luna61.2%

    GPT-6 Astra leads this result

  • HealthBench Hard

    Shared source
    GPT-6 Astra36.6%
    GPT-6 Luna31.4%

    GPT-6 Astra leads this result

Instruction following

  • Gray Swan IPI (15 attempts)

    GPT-6 Astra8.5%
    Source
    GPT-6 Luna—

    Not directly comparable

Math

  • FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)

    GPT-6 Astra97.600%
    Source
    GPT-6 Luna56.098%
    Source

    GPT-6 Astra leads this result

  • FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)

    Shared source
    GPT-6 Astra93.684%
    GPT-6 Luna78.947%

    GPT-6 Astra leads this result

50 public results · 22 shared

Watch GPT-6 Astra vs GPT-6 Luna

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

Read a sample issue

Join 6,100+ subscribers.

Last updated November 6, 2026