gemini-3-flash
Checking current pricing…
Chat comparison
gemini-3-flashvsgpt-5.6-luna
Compare the things that matter before you build: current price, capabilities, and latest aggregated LLM7 statistics.
Current pricing
See the cost difference clearly
gpt-5.6-luna
Checking current pricing…
What's different
Only capabilities that differ between these models are listed. Green highlights the broader supported option or larger context window.
Input formats
gemini-3-flash
text
gpt-5.6-luna
text, image
Vision
gemini-3-flash
Not supported
gpt-5.6-lunaBetter fit
Supported
Latest LLM7 statistics
Recent aggregated percentages and response-time metrics from LLM7, not a global model benchmark or traffic disclosure.
Recent stability
gemini-3-flash
81.67%
gpt-5.6-luna
84.72%
Average response time
gemini-3-flash
6,437.71 ms
gpt-5.6-luna
58,748.88 ms
P95 API latency
gemini-3-flash
30,000 ms
gpt-5.6-luna
60,000 ms
Side-by-side trends
Shared charts make the observed differences easier to read. Metrics without enough history stay hidden.
Request success rate
Both models on the same scale
gemini-3-flash: 92.2%gpt-5.6-luna: 98.3%
Average API latency
Both models on the same scale
gemini-3-flash: 4,470 msgpt-5.6-luna: 27,997 ms
P95 API latency
Both models on the same scale
gemini-3-flash: 30,000 msgpt-5.6-luna: 60,000 ms
Estimate your workload
Published rates are loaded from the pricing API; per-request quotes are billed from actual provider usage.
Checking current pricing…
Checking current pricing…
Quick take
- gpt-5.6-luna supports image input while the other model does not.
- gpt-5.6-luna recorded higher recent LLM7 stability during this period.
- gemini-3-flash recorded a lower observed p95 API latency on LLM7 during this period.