Pick Claude Opus 5.5 for performs at roughly claude fable 5.1's level on most work, at 40% lower typical workload cost than opus 5 or anthropic reports it surpasses fable 5.1 on agentic coding, knowledge work, computer use, visual chart recognition, and multidisciplinary reasoning. Pick GPT-5.6 Luna for cheapest gpt-5.6 tier for high-volume drafting and automation or fast, affordable execution while keeping respectable coding. On a tight budget at scale, GPT-5.6 Luna is the value pick.
Claude Opus 5.5 (Anthropic) and GPT-5.6 Luna (OpenAI) are two of the models people most often weigh against each other in 2026. Claude Opus 5.5 is anthropic's September 22, 2026 update: Fable 5.1-level performance at 40% lower cost than Opus 5, with faster output and cheaper caching. GPT-5.6 Luna is the budget, high-throughput GPT-5.6 tier — built for cheap, fast, large-volume work rather than deep long-context reasoning. Their biggest split is price, and the breakdown below shows exactly how that plays out for your workload.
Key differences
Price: GPT-5.6 Luna is about 4× cheaper on input ($1/$6 per 1M tokens vs $4/$20 per 1M tokens) — meaningful once you are processing millions of tokens a month.
Context window: both advertise 1M tokens (~1,500 pages). Tie on paper — test on your own long inputs, since usable recall varies by model.
Recency: Claude Opus 5.5 is the newer model by about 3 months (released September 22, 2026), usually meaning fresher training data and capabilities.
Specifications
Spec
Claude Opus 5.5
GPT-5.6 Luna
Provider
Anthropic (US)
OpenAI (US)
Released
September 22, 2026
July 9, 2026
Context window
1M tokens (~1,500 pages)
1M (~1,500 pages)
Price (in/out)
$4/$20 per 1M tokens
$1/$6 per 1M tokens
Open weight?
No — API only
No — API only
Modalities
text, image, code
text, image, code
SWE-Bench Verified
Not published
Not published
MRCR v2 @ 1M
Not published
Not published
Who wins what
Performs at roughly Claude Fable 5.1's level on most work, at 40% lower typical workload cost than Opus 5: Claude Opus 5.5 — Anthropic's September 22, 2026 update: Fable 5.1-level performance at 40% lower cost than Opus 5, with faster output and cheaper caching — and it is the newer of the two.
Anthropic reports it surpasses Fable 5.1 on agentic coding, knowledge work, computer use, visual chart recognition, and multidisciplinary reasoning: Claude Opus 5.5 — Claude Opus 5.5 lists anthropic reports it surpasses Fable 5.1 on agentic coding, knowledge work, computer use, visual chart recognition, and multidisciplinary reasoning among its strengths; GPT-5.6 Luna does not.
Pricing cut to $4/$20 per million tokens (20% below Opus 5's $5/$25), cache reads down 60% to $0.20/MTok: Claude Opus 5.5 — GPT-5.6 Luna is comparatively weak here — weak long-context recall deep in its 1M window (MRCR far below Sol)
Cheapest GPT-5.6 tier for high-volume drafting and automation: GPT-5.6 Luna — At $1/$6 per 1M tokens it undercuts Claude Opus 5.5 ($4/$20 per 1M tokens), and that gap compounds at volume.
Fast, affordable execution while keeping respectable coding: GPT-5.6 Luna — The budget, high-throughput GPT-5.6 tier — built for cheap, fast, large-volume work rather than deep long-context reasoning — and it runs cheaper at $1/$6 per 1M tokens.
Same 1M context and programmatic tool calling as its siblings: GPT-5.6 Luna — Claude Opus 5.5 is comparatively weak here — like Opus 5, the headline 1M-token context is not uniformly available across every platform and plan — some API paths default to a smaller window
Lowest cost at scale: GPT-5.6 Luna — At $1/$6 per 1M tokens, it is the cheaper of the two — the gap dominates the bill on high-volume workloads.
Which should you pick?
A cost-sensitive startup shipping high volume: GPT-5.6 Luna — At $1/$6 per 1M tokens it undercuts Claude Opus 5.5, and on millions of tokens that margin decides the monthly bill.
Anyone whose priority is performs at roughly claude fable 5.1's level on most work, at 40% lower typical workload cost than opus 5: Claude Opus 5.5 — It is specifically built for that.
Anyone whose priority is cheapest gpt-5.6 tier for high-volume drafting and automation: GPT-5.6 Luna — That is its strongest area.
Claude Opus 5.5: where it fits
Anthropic's September 22, 2026 update: Fable 5.1-level performance at 40% lower cost than Opus 5, with faster output and cheaper caching. Released September 22, 2026 by Anthropic, it is built for performs at roughly Claude Fable 5.1's level on most work, at 40% lower typical workload cost than Opus 5, anthropic reports it surpasses Fable 5.1 on agentic coding, knowledge work, computer use, visual chart recognition, and multidisciplinary reasoning, pricing cut to $4/$20 per million tokens (20% below Opus 5's $5/$25), cache reads down 60% to $0.20/MTok, and output speed increased over 30% versus Opus 5.
Its trade-offs are real: not a reasoning-ceiling upgrade over Fable 5.1 — pitched as matching its performance at lower cost, not beating it outright, like Opus 5, the headline 1M-token context is not uniformly available across every platform and plan — some API paths default to a smaller window, and first model in the 5.5 line; Anthropic has signaled Sonnet 5.5 and Haiku 5.5 are still weeks away, so the lower tiers of the family aren't out yet. At $4 in / $20 out per million tokens, it sits in the mid price band.
GPT-5.6 Luna: where it fits
The budget, high-throughput GPT-5.6 tier — built for cheap, fast, large-volume work rather than deep long-context reasoning. Released July 9, 2026 by OpenAI, it is built for cheapest GPT-5.6 tier for high-volume drafting and automation, fast, affordable execution while keeping respectable coding, same 1M context and programmatic tool calling as its siblings, and high-throughput simple agentic jobs.
Its trade-offs: weak long-context recall deep in its 1M window (MRCR far below Sol), and lowest raw capability of the three GPT-5.6 tiers; no open weights. At $1 in / $6 out per million tokens, it sits in the budget price band.
The bottom line for this matchup
Claude Opus 5.5 and GPT-5.6 Luna overlap enough that the right pick depends on your specific job. GPT-5.6 Luna costs less per token; and each leads in its own area — Claude Opus 5.5 for performs at roughly claude fable 5.1's level on most work, at 40% lower typical workload cost than opus 5, GPT-5.6 Luna for cheapest gpt-5.6 tier for high-volume drafting and automation. Rather than crowning one, run the same hard task through both once and let the results decide.
Frequently asked questions
Is Claude Opus 5.5 or GPT-5.6 Luna better for coding?
Public SWE-Bench figures are not available for either model, so the honest test is your own repository — run an identical real bug through both. By design, Claude Opus 5.5 leans toward performs at roughly claude fable 5.1's level on most work, at 40% lower typical workload cost than opus 5 while GPT-5.6 Luna leans toward cheapest gpt-5.6 tier for high-volume drafting and automation, and that positioning usually predicts which feels better on your codebase.
Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 5.5 or GPT-5.6 Luna?
GPT-5.6 Luna is cheaper — $4/$20 per 1M tokens vs $1/$6 per 1M tokens, roughly 4× apart on input.
Which has the bigger context window?
Both advertise 1M tokens (~1,500 pages). Remember advertised ≠ usable: recall typically degrades before the ceiling.
Can I use both Claude Opus 5.5 and GPT-5.6 Luna together?
Yes — a multi-model platform like LumiChats gives you Claude Opus 5.5, GPT-5.6 Luna and 40+ others under one ₹69/day pass (about $1/day), so you can draft with one and cross-check with the other instead of buying two subscriptions.
Which is newer, Claude Opus 5.5 or GPT-5.6 Luna?
Claude Opus 5.5 — released September 22, 2026, about 3 months after GPT-5.6 Luna.
Claude Opus 5.5 vs GPT-5.6 Luna
Anthropic · US | OpenAI · US · Updated June 2026
Quick verdict
Pick Claude Opus 5.5 for performs at roughly claude fable 5.1's level on most work, at 40% lower typical workload cost than opus 5 or anthropic reports it surpasses fable 5.1 on agentic coding, knowledge work, computer use, visual chart recognition, and multidisciplinary reasoning. Pick GPT-5.6 Luna for cheapest gpt-5.6 tier for high-volume drafting and automation or fast, affordable execution while keeping respectable coding. On a tight budget at scale, GPT-5.6 Luna is the value pick.
Claude Opus 5.5 (Anthropic) and GPT-5.6 Luna (OpenAI) are two of the models people most often weigh against each other in 2026. Claude Opus 5.5 is anthropic's September 22, 2026 update: Fable 5.1-level performance at 40% lower cost than Opus 5, with faster output and cheaper caching. GPT-5.6 Luna is the budget, high-throughput GPT-5.6 tier — built for cheap, fast, large-volume work rather than deep long-context reasoning. Their biggest split is price, and the breakdown below shows exactly how that plays out for your workload.
Key differences at a glance
▸Price: GPT-5.6 Luna is about 4× cheaper on input ($1/$6 per 1M tokens vs $4/$20 per 1M tokens) — meaningful once you are processing millions of tokens a month.
▸Context window: both advertise 1M tokens (~1,500 pages). Tie on paper — test on your own long inputs, since usable recall varies by model.
▸Recency: Claude Opus 5.5 is the newer model by about 3 months (released September 22, 2026), usually meaning fresher training data and capabilities.
Side-by-side specs
Spec
Claude Opus 5.5
GPT-5.6 Luna
Provider
Anthropic (US)
OpenAI (US)
Released
September 22, 2026
July 9, 2026
Context window
1M tokens (~1,500 pages)
1M (~1,500 pages)
Price (in/out)
$4/$20 per 1M tokens
$1/$6 per 1M tokens
Open weight?
No — API only
No — API only
Modalities
text, image, code
text, image, code
SWE-Bench Verified
Not published
Not published
MRCR v2 @ 1M
Not published
Not published
Who wins what
Performs at roughly Claude Fable 5.1's level on most work, at 40% lower typical workload cost than Opus 5
Claude Opus 5.5
Anthropic's September 22, 2026 update: Fable 5.1-level performance at 40% lower cost than Opus 5, with faster output and cheaper caching — and it is the newer of the two.
Anthropic reports it surpasses Fable 5.1 on agentic coding, knowledge work, computer use, visual chart recognition, and multidisciplinary reasoning
Claude Opus 5.5
Claude Opus 5.5 lists anthropic reports it surpasses Fable 5.1 on agentic coding, knowledge work, computer use, visual chart recognition, and multidisciplinary reasoning among its strengths; GPT-5.6 Luna does not.
Pricing cut to $4/$20 per million tokens (20% below Opus 5's $5/$25), cache reads down 60% to $0.20/MTok
Claude Opus 5.5
GPT-5.6 Luna is comparatively weak here — weak long-context recall deep in its 1M window (MRCR far below Sol)
Cheapest GPT-5.6 tier for high-volume drafting and automation
GPT-5.6 Luna
At $1/$6 per 1M tokens it undercuts Claude Opus 5.5 ($4/$20 per 1M tokens), and that gap compounds at volume.
Fast, affordable execution while keeping respectable coding
GPT-5.6 Luna
The budget, high-throughput GPT-5.6 tier — built for cheap, fast, large-volume work rather than deep long-context reasoning — and it runs cheaper at $1/$6 per 1M tokens.
Same 1M context and programmatic tool calling as its siblings
GPT-5.6 Luna
Claude Opus 5.5 is comparatively weak here — like Opus 5, the headline 1M-token context is not uniformly available across every platform and plan — some API paths default to a smaller window
Lowest cost at scale
GPT-5.6 Luna
At $1/$6 per 1M tokens, it is the cheaper of the two — the gap dominates the bill on high-volume workloads.
Which should you pick?
A cost-sensitive startup shipping high volume
→ GPT-5.6 Luna
At $1/$6 per 1M tokens it undercuts Claude Opus 5.5, and on millions of tokens that margin decides the monthly bill.
Anyone whose priority is performs at roughly claude fable 5.1's level on most work, at 40% lower typical workload cost than opus 5
→ Claude Opus 5.5
It is specifically built for that.
Anyone whose priority is cheapest gpt-5.6 tier for high-volume drafting and automation
→ GPT-5.6 Luna
That is its strongest area.
Claude Opus 5.5: where it fits
Anthropic's September 22, 2026 update: Fable 5.1-level performance at 40% lower cost than Opus 5, with faster output and cheaper caching. Released September 22, 2026 by Anthropic, it is built for performs at roughly Claude Fable 5.1's level on most work, at 40% lower typical workload cost than Opus 5, anthropic reports it surpasses Fable 5.1 on agentic coding, knowledge work, computer use, visual chart recognition, and multidisciplinary reasoning, pricing cut to $4/$20 per million tokens (20% below Opus 5's $5/$25), cache reads down 60% to $0.20/MTok, and output speed increased over 30% versus Opus 5.
Its trade-offs are real: not a reasoning-ceiling upgrade over Fable 5.1 — pitched as matching its performance at lower cost, not beating it outright, like Opus 5, the headline 1M-token context is not uniformly available across every platform and plan — some API paths default to a smaller window, and first model in the 5.5 line; Anthropic has signaled Sonnet 5.5 and Haiku 5.5 are still weeks away, so the lower tiers of the family aren't out yet. At $4 in / $20 out per million tokens, it sits in the mid price band.
GPT-5.6 Luna: where it fits
The budget, high-throughput GPT-5.6 tier — built for cheap, fast, large-volume work rather than deep long-context reasoning. Released July 9, 2026 by OpenAI, it is built for cheapest GPT-5.6 tier for high-volume drafting and automation, fast, affordable execution while keeping respectable coding, same 1M context and programmatic tool calling as its siblings, and high-throughput simple agentic jobs.
Its trade-offs: weak long-context recall deep in its 1M window (MRCR far below Sol), and lowest raw capability of the three GPT-5.6 tiers; no open weights. At $1 in / $6 out per million tokens, it sits in the budget price band.
The bottom line for this matchup
Claude Opus 5.5 and GPT-5.6 Luna overlap enough that the right pick depends on your specific job. GPT-5.6 Luna costs less per token; and each leads in its own area — Claude Opus 5.5 for performs at roughly claude fable 5.1's level on most work, at 40% lower typical workload cost than opus 5, GPT-5.6 Luna for cheapest gpt-5.6 tier for high-volume drafting and automation. Rather than crowning one, run the same hard task through both once and let the results decide.
Want both Claude Opus 5.5 and GPT-5.6 Luna without two subscriptions? LumiChats gives you these plus 40+ models under one ₹69/day pass (about $1/day) — draft with one, cross-check with the other.
Is Claude Opus 5.5 or GPT-5.6 Luna better for coding?
Public SWE-Bench figures are not available for either model, so the honest test is your own repository — run an identical real bug through both. By design, Claude Opus 5.5 leans toward performs at roughly claude fable 5.1's level on most work, at 40% lower typical workload cost than opus 5 while GPT-5.6 Luna leans toward cheapest gpt-5.6 tier for high-volume drafting and automation, and that positioning usually predicts which feels better on your codebase.
Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 5.5 or GPT-5.6 Luna?
GPT-5.6 Luna is cheaper — $4/$20 per 1M tokens vs $1/$6 per 1M tokens, roughly 4× apart on input.
Which has the bigger context window?
Both advertise 1M tokens (~1,500 pages). Remember advertised ≠ usable: recall typically degrades before the ceiling.
Can I use both Claude Opus 5.5 and GPT-5.6 Luna together?
Yes — a multi-model platform like LumiChats gives you Claude Opus 5.5, GPT-5.6 Luna and 40+ others under one ₹69/day pass (about $1/day), so you can draft with one and cross-check with the other instead of buying two subscriptions.
Which is newer, Claude Opus 5.5 or GPT-5.6 Luna?
Claude Opus 5.5 — released September 22, 2026, about 3 months after GPT-5.6 Luna.
Specifications and benchmarks reflect publicly reported figures as of June 2026 and may change as providers release updates. Always verify on your own workload.