AI model comparison
Ling 3.1 Flash vs GPT-6 Luna
Pricing, context window, benchmarks, and features compared side by side. Or skip the guesswork and send one prompt to both.
inclusionAI
Ling 3.1 Flash
Ling 3.1 Flash is a hybrid reasoning mixture-of-experts model from inclusionAI, with 25B active parameters out of 560B total.
- Input / 1M
- $0.00
- Output / 1M
- $0.00
- Context
- 262K
OpenAI
GPT-6 Luna
GPT-6 Luna is the fast, cost-efficient model in OpenAI's GPT-6 series, positioned below GPT-6 Sol.
- Input / 1M
- $0.10
- Output / 1M
- $0.50
- Context
- 1.05M
At a glance
Quick verdict
How the two models stack up on the things people ask about most.
Lower price
Ling 3.1 Flash
Free for a typical chat
Higher intelligence score
Ling 3.1 Flash
41.1 vs 38.1 on Artificial Analysis
Larger context window
GPT-6 Luna
1.05M vs 262K tokens
Newer release
Ling 3.1 Flash
Released October 2, 2026
Benchmarks
Benchmark scores
Independent scores from Artificial Analysis. Higher is better.
Intelligence index
GPT-6 Luna38.1Coding index
GPT-6 LunaNot availableAgentic index
GPT-6 LunaNot availablePricing
Ling 3.1 Flash vs GPT-6 Luna API pricing
Per-token API rates. Cheaper option highlighted.
| Metric | GPT-6 Luna | |
|---|---|---|
| Input tokensPer 1M tokens | $0.00 | $0.10 |
| Output tokensPer 1M tokens | $0.00 | $0.50 |
| Cached input (read)Per 1M tokens | Not available | $0.01 |
| Cache writePer 1M tokens | Not available | $0.13 |
| Long-context pricingPer 1M tokens, for very long prompts | Same rate at any length | $0.20 in / $0.75 out above 272K |
| Web searchPer request | Not available | $0.01 |
What it costs in practice
Estimated cost per 1,000 requests at standard rates. Coding and long-document figures also show the cost when the input is already cached.
Chat message
2K in, 500 out
GPT-6 Luna$0.45Coding task
30K in, 4K out
GPT-6 Luna$5$2.30 cachedLong document summary
150K in, 2K out
GPT-6 Luna$16$2.50 cachedSpecs
Context window and capabilities
How much each model can read, how much it can write, and what it accepts as input.
| Metric | GPT-6 Luna | |
|---|---|---|
| Context window | 262K tokens | 1.05M tokens |
| Max output | 33K tokens | 128K tokens |
| Input types | Text | File, Image, Text |
| Output types | Text | Text |
| Reasoning effort levels | Not available | Max, Extra high, High, Medium, Low, None |
| Default reasoning effort | Not available | Medium |
| Release date | October 2, 2026 | September 22, 2026 |
Features
Supported features
API features available for each model.
| Metric | GPT-6 Luna | |
|---|---|---|
| Tool calling | Supported | Supported |
| Structured outputs | Not supported | Supported |
| JSON mode | Not supported | Supported |
| Reasoning | Supported | Supported |
| Temperature | Supported | Not supported |
| Stop sequences | Supported | Not supported |
| Deterministic seed | Supported | Supported |
| Verbosity control | Not supported | Supported |
Keep exploring
More on these models
Other head-to-heads, the full model page, and the alternatives list for each model.
GPT-6 LunaView full model details- GPT-6 Luna vs DeepSeek V4.1 Flash
- GPT-6 Luna vs GLM 5.3 Flash
- GPT-6 Luna vs MiMo-V2.6-Flash
- GPT-6 Luna vs Hy4 preview
- GPT-6 Luna vs DeepSeek V4 Flash 0731
- GPT-6 Luna vs Claude Opus 5.5
- GPT-6 Luna vs GLM 5.3
- GPT-6 Luna vs DeepSeek V4 Flash 0423
- GPT-6 Luna vs Step 5 Preview
- GPT-6 Luna vs Gemini 3.8 Flash
- GPT-6 Luna vs Hy3
- GPT-6 Luna vs GPT-5.6 Luna
- GPT-6 Luna vs GPT-6.1 Sol
- GPT-6 Luna vs Muse Spark 1.3 Contributor
- GPT-6 Luna vs Claude Sonnet 5.5
- GPT-6 Luna vs MiMo-V2.6-Pro
- GPT-6 Luna vs DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813
- GPT-6 Luna vs GPT-6 Astra
- GPT-6 Luna vs Claude Opus 5
- GPT-6 Luna vs Claude Fable 5.1
- GPT-6 Luna vs DeepSeek V4 Pro 0423
- GPT-6 Luna vs Solar Pro 4
- GPT-6 Luna vs GPT-6 Luna Pro
- GPT-6 Luna vs Claude Haiku 5.5
- GPT-6 Luna vs Qwen3.8 Flash
- GPT-6 Luna vs Qwen3.7 Flash
- GPT-6 Luna vs DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision Exp
- GPT-6 Luna vs GLM 5.3 FlashX
- GPT-6 Luna vs GPT-5.6 Luna Pro
Our take
Ling 3.1 Flash scores higher on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index (41.1 vs 38.1). GPT-6 Luna has the larger context window (1.05M vs 262K tokens). The right pick depends on your workload, so the quickest way to settle it is to send the same prompt to both and compare.
FAQ
Frequently asked questions
Is Ling 3.1 Flash or GPT-6 Luna cheaper?
Ling 3.1 Flash is cheaper for a typical chat (2K input tokens and 500 output tokens). Ling 3.1 Flash costs $0.00 per 1M input tokens and $0.00 per 1M output tokens, while GPT-6 Luna costs $0.10 per 1M input tokens and $0.50 per 1M output tokens.
Which has a bigger context window, Ling 3.1 Flash or GPT-6 Luna?
GPT-6 Luna supports up to 1.05M tokens of context, compared with 262K for Ling 3.1 Flash.
Is Ling 3.1 Flash smarter than GPT-6 Luna?
On the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, Ling 3.1 Flash scores 41.1 and GPT-6 Luna scores 38.1, putting Ling 3.1 Flash ahead. Benchmarks don't capture everything, so the best test is running your own prompts through both.
Can I use Ling 3.1 Flash and GPT-6 Luna at the same time?
Yes. Shortcut Chat sends one prompt to multiple models at once, so you can see Ling 3.1 Flash and GPT-6 Luna answer side by side and keep the better response.
Why choose? Ask both.
Send one prompt to Ling 3.1 Flash and GPT-6 Luna at the same time. Compare the answers side by side and keep the best one.