GPT-6 Luna (Low) vs Qwen3.7 Max
Which is better for the money: GPT-6 Luna (Low) 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 8.0 points higher (29.5 vs 21.5) but costs 214× as much to run the benchmark ($2277 vs $10.6; flagship vs budget cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Qwen3.7 Max when you need intelligence above 21.5, and GPT-6 Luna (Low) when 21.5 is enough.
| Metric | GPT-6 Luna (Low) | Qwen3.7 Max | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 21.5 | 29.5 | +37.2% Qwen3.7 Max is 37.2% more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $10.63 | $2,277.12 | +21321.6% Qwen3.7 Max is 214× more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 7.32s | 16.64s | +127.3% Qwen3.7 Max is 127.3% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.10 / $0.50 | $2.50 / $7.50 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text |
Qwen3.7 Max vs GPT-6 Luna (Low): 37.2% more intelligence, 21321.6% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 127.3% slower end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- GPT-6 Luna (Low) is on today's frontier: nothing is both smarter and cheaper.
- 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-6 Luna (Low)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-6-luna-low/qwen3-7-max · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/gpt-6-luna-low/qwen3-7-max?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill