GPT-5.6 Luna (Medium) vs Qwen3.7 Max
Which is better for the money: GPT-5.6 Luna (Medium) by OpenAI or Qwen3.7 Max by Alibaba? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-26.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
Qwen3.7 Max scores 4.5 points higher (29.5 vs 25.0) but costs 51× as much to run the benchmark ($2277 vs $44.3; flagship vs budget cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Qwen3.7 Max when you need intelligence above 25.0, and GPT-5.6 Luna (Medium) when 25.0 is enough.
| Metric | GPT-5.6 Luna (Medium) | Qwen3.7 Max | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 25.0 | 29.5 | +18.0% Qwen3.7 Max is 18.0% more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $44.32 | $2,277.12 | +5037.9% Qwen3.7 Max is 51× more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 6.43s | 16.64s | +158.8% Qwen3.7 Max is 158.8% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.20 / $1.20 | $2.50 / $7.50 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text |
Qwen3.7 Max vs GPT-5.6 Luna (Medium): 18.0% more intelligence, 5037.9% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 158.8% slower end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- GPT-5.6 Luna (Medium) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6 Luna (Medium) scores 29.90 for $31.2.
- Qwen3.7 Max is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, Claude Opus 5.5 (High, Default Fallback) scores 53.60 for $2172.
GPT-5.6 Luna (Medium)Qwen3.7 MaxToday'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/gpt-5-6-luna-medium/qwen3-7-max · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/gpt-5-6-luna-medium/qwen3-7-max?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill