Claude Opus 5 (Medium) vs GPT-6 Luna (Xhigh)
Which is better for the money: Claude Opus 5 (Medium) by Anthropic or GPT-6 Luna (Xhigh) by OpenAI? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-24.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
Claude Opus 5 (Medium) scores 10.2 points higher (44.8 vs 34.6) but costs 41× as much to run the benchmark ($2732 vs $66.8; flagship vs mid-range cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Claude Opus 5 (Medium) when you need intelligence above 34.6, and GPT-6 Luna (Xhigh) when 34.6 is enough.
| Metric | Claude Opus 5 (Medium) | GPT-6 Luna (Xhigh) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 44.8 | 34.6 | −22.8% GPT-6 Luna (Xhigh) is 22.8% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $2,731.91 | $66.81 | −97.6% GPT-6 Luna (Xhigh) is 97.6% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 13.14s | 21.27s | +61.9% GPT-6 Luna (Xhigh) is 61.9% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $5.00 / $25.0 | $0.10 / $0.50 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image |
GPT-6 Luna (Xhigh) vs Claude Opus 5 (Medium): 22.8% less intelligence, 97.6% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 61.9% slower end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Claude Opus 5 (Medium) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, Claude Opus 5.5 (High, Default Fallback) scores 53.60 for $2172.
- GPT-6 Luna (Xhigh) is on today's frontier: nothing is both smarter and cheaper.
Claude Opus 5 (Medium)GPT-6 Luna (Xhigh)Today's Pareto frontierEvery other model
Matchup
Compare something else
Agents:
Accept: text/markdown or ?format=md returns this page as Markdown. JSON: /api/v1/compare/claude-opus-5-medium/gpt-6-luna-xhigh · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/claude-opus-5-medium/gpt-6-luna-xhigh?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill