Directory · Model comparison
GPT-5.6 Luna vs Grok 4.6
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 | GPT-5.6 Luna | Grok 4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| Input cost / 1M | $0.20 | $2.00 |
| Output cost / 1M | $1.20 | $6.00 |
| Context window | 1,050,000 tokens | 500,000 tokens |
| MMLU score | — | — |
Cost verdict
Enter monthly input and output volumes to see total cost savings.
GPT-5.6 Luna
- Input: 1M × $0.20 = $0.20
- Output: 1M × $1.20 = $1.20
- Total
- $1.40
Grok 4.6
- Input: 1M × $2.00 = $2.00
- Output: 1M × $6.00 = $6.00
- Total
- $8.00
Total cost savings
$6.60
GPT-5.6 Luna saves $6.60 per month vs the other model at this volume.
Model routing savings
Uses this page's verified rates. Grok 4.6 is the premium route (higher combined per-1M cost); GPT-5.6 Luna handles routine traffic.
All premium
Grok 4.6
$400.00
100% of input and output on the premium route
Routed stack
80% → GPT-5.6 Luna
20% → Grok 4.6
$136.00
- Routine slice
- $56.00
- Premium slice
- $80.00
Monthly savings
$264.00
66% lower
Rates pulled from this page's model database entries (grok-4-6, 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.