Claude Opus 5 vs GPT-5.6 Luna

GPT-5.6 Luna is the cheaper of the two, at 22x less on a blended 3:1 input-to-output rate. Claude Opus 5 runs $5.00 in / $25.00 out per 1M tokens; GPT-5.6 Luna runs $0.20 in / $1.20 out.

On the heaviest scenario below, that gap is $11,980 a month ($143,760 a year) for identical volume. Verified 2026-08-16.

Side by side

Claude Opus 5 GPT-5.6 Luna
Provider Anthropic OpenAI
Input per 1M tokens $5.00 $0.20
Output per 1M tokens $25.00 $1.20
Cached input per 1M $0.50 $0.02
Batch discount 50% Not offered
Output-to-input ratio 5.0x 6.0x
Blended per 1M (3:1) $10.00 $0.450

What each costs on the same workload

Rate cards are hard to compare directly because the input:output mix changes the answer. These four scenarios hold the workload fixed and vary only the model, with no caching or batch discount applied to either side.

Workload Claude Opus 5 GPT-5.6 Luna Monthly difference Cheaper
Support chatbot
50,000 conversations/month at 3K input and 500 output tokens each
$1,375 $60.00 $1,315 GPT-5.6 Luna
RAG document search
200,000 queries/month at 6K retrieved-context input and 400 output tokens
$8,000 $336.00 $7,664 GPT-5.6 Luna
Coding agent
5,000 runs/month at 60K input and 8K output tokens per run
$2,500 $108.00 $2,392 GPT-5.6 Luna
Bulk classification
5,000,000 items/month at 400 input and 20 output tokens each
$12,500 $520.00 $11,980 GPT-5.6 Luna

Which should you actually pick?

GPT-5.6 Luna is cheaper on both input and output, so on price alone it wins regardless of your token mix. That does not automatically make it the right call: these are different models with different capability profiles, and paying 22x more is justified whenever the more expensive model gets the task right on the first attempt and the cheaper one needs two or three tries, or needs human correction downstream.

Discounts can also flip the arithmetic. Prompt caching is the bigger lever of the two for anything that resends a stable prefix: see the prompt caching savings calculator. If the work is latency-tolerant, the batch API savings calculator is worth a look before you decide.

Claude Opus 5 vs GPT-5.6 Luna: common questions

Is Claude Opus 5 or GPT-5.6 Luna cheaper?

GPT-5.6 Luna is cheaper overall, at 22x less on a blended 3:1 input-to-output rate ($0.450 vs $10.00 per 1M blended tokens). It is cheaper on both input and output.

What is the price difference between Claude Opus 5 and GPT-5.6 Luna on a real workload?

On the bulk classification scenario (5,000,000 items/month at 400 input and 20 output tokens each), Claude Opus 5 costs $12,500 a month and GPT-5.6 Luna costs $520.00. That is a difference of $11,980 a month, or $143,760 a year, for the same volume of work.

Does Claude Opus 5 or GPT-5.6 Luna have better discounts?

Claude Opus 5 offers cached input at $0.50 and a 50% batch discount. GPT-5.6 Luna offers cached input at $0.02. On cache-heavy or latency-tolerant workloads these can matter more than the headline rate.

Should I switch from Claude Opus 5 to GPT-5.6 Luna?

Only if the cheaper model actually does the job. Price is the easy half of the decision; the hard half is whether output quality holds on your task. Run both against a sample of real traffic, then use the model switching savings calculator to put a number on the annual difference before committing.

Other comparisons

GPT-5.6 Luna vs GPT-5.6 SolClaude Opus 5 vs GPT-5.6 SolGPT-5.6 Luna vs GPT-5.6 TerraClaude Opus 5 vs GPT-5.6 TerraClaude Sonnet 5 vs GPT-5.6 LunaClaude Haiku 4.5 vs GPT-5.6 LunaGemini 3.1 Pro vs GPT-5.6 LunaGemini 3.7 Flash vs GPT-5.6 Luna

Go deeper

Rates last checked 2026-08-16 against Anthropic Pricing and OpenAI Pricing. Cost scenarios are arithmetic on published list rates, not benchmarks: they say nothing about which model produces better output for your task.