Home / Compare / GPT-6 Luna vs Qwen3.7 Flash

GPT-6 Luna vs Qwen3.7 Flash

For a typical chat reply (2,000 tokens in, 400 out), GPT-6 Luna costs 3.6× as much as Qwen3.7 Flash: $0.40 against $0.112 per 1,000 requests at list price on 2026-09-28.

GPT-6 LunaQwen3.7 Flash
Input, per 1M tokens$0.10$0.03
Output, per 1M tokens$0.50$0.13
Context window1.05M1M
Classification or routing (600 tokens in, 10 out), per 1,000$0.065$0.0193
Chat reply (2,000 in, 400 out), per 1,000$0.40$0.112
Retrieval-augmented answer (8,000 in, 500 out), per 1,000$1.05$0.305
Confidence signalnoyes
Tool callingyesyes
BANKING77, correct of 400320286

Which one should carry your traffic?

If Qwen3.7 Flash answers your requests as well as GPT-6 Luna, moving that traffic saves 72% on chat-shaped requests. Averages cannot tell you whether it does for your requests. Qwen3.7 Flash exposes a confidence signal, so Gimbix can let it answer first and hand unsure cases to GPT-6 Luna.

GPT-6 Luna profile · Qwen3.7 Flash profile · Measure it on your traffic