Directory · Model comparison
Gemini 3.7 Flash vs GPT-5.6 Luna
Side-by-side API economics and benchmarks. Per-1M input and output rates, context window, and verified metrics.
Tale of the tape
Head-to-head specs pulled from each model profile.
| Metric | Gemini 3.7 Flash | GPT-5.6 Luna |
|---|---|---|
| Input cost / 1M | $0.75 | $0.20 |
| Output cost / 1M | $3.75 | $1.20 |
| Context window | 1,048,576 tokens | 1,050,000 tokens |
| MMLU score | — | — |
Cost verdict
Enter monthly input and output volumes to see total cost savings.
Gemini 3.7 Flash
- Input: 1M × $0.75 = $0.75
- Output: 1M × $3.75 = $3.75
- Total
- $4.50
GPT-5.6 Luna
- Input: 1M × $0.20 = $0.20
- Output: 1M × $1.20 = $1.20
- Total
- $1.40
Total cost savings
$3.10
GPT-5.6 Luna saves $3.10 per month vs the other model at this volume.
Model routing savings
Uses this page's verified rates. Gemini 3.7 Flash is the premium route (higher combined per-1M cost); GPT-5.6 Luna handles routine traffic.
All premium
Gemini 3.7 Flash
$225.00
100% of input and output on the premium route
Routed stack
80% → GPT-5.6 Luna
20% → Gemini 3.7 Flash
$101.00
- Routine slice
- $56.00
- Premium slice
- $45.00
Monthly savings
$124.00
55.1% lower
Rates pulled from this page's model database entries (gemini-3-7-flash, gpt-5-6-luna) — same per-1M input/output figures as Tale of the tape. Production routing needs quality gates and monitoring.
Related comparisons
More head-to-head model matchups.