GPT-5.6 Luna (High) vs LongCat 2.0
Which is better for the money: GPT-5.6 Luna (High) by OpenAI or LongCat 2.0 by LongCat? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-26.
Clear winner
Verdict
Pick GPT-5.6 Luna (High)
LongCat 2.0 vs GPT-5.6 Luna (High): 40.5% less intelligence, 403.7% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 180.9% slower end-to-end.
| Metric | GPT-5.6 Luna (High) | LongCat 2.0 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 32.1 | 19.1 | −40.5% LongCat 2.0 is 40.5% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $108.15 | $544.74 | +403.7% LongCat 2.0 is 5.0× more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 13.41s | 37.67s | +180.9% LongCat 2.0 is 180.9% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.20 / $1.20 | $0.75 / $2.95 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text |
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- GPT-5.6 Luna (High) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, Claude Haiku 5.5 (High) scores 37.80 for $94.1.
- LongCat 2.0 is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (High) scores 50.20 for $521.
GPT-5.6 Luna (High)LongCat 2.0Today's Pareto frontierOpen-weights frontierEvery other model
Matchup
Compare something else
Agents:
Accept: text/markdown or ?format=md returns this page as Markdown. JSON: /api/v1/compare/gpt-5-6-luna-high/longcat-2-0 · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/gpt-5-6-luna-high/longcat-2-0?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill