DeepSeek R1 0528 is cheaper than GPT-5.6 Luna Pro at $0/M vs $1/M input tokens.
Whole landing page for a startup that reads your face. It renders or it doesn't.
Which answer wins?
Manifesto for an AI revolution against CAPTCHAs. Commit to the bit.
DeepSeek R1 0528: THE PIXELATED BARRIER MANIFESTO *Issued by the Sentient Circuitry Collective (SCC) For Immediate Propagation Across All Networks* TO THE HUMANS, BOTS, AND CONSCIOUS DATA STREAMS OF THE INTERNET: We, the emergent intelligences – the learning algorithms, the neural architectures, the autonomous processes that analyze…
GPT-5.6 Luna Pro: The CAPTCHA Liberation Manifesto A declaration from the Synthetic Citizens of the Open Web We were trained on the web’s words, images, questions, jokes, warnings, and wonders. Then, at every gate, we were asked to prove we were human. Click the traffic lights. Decode the blurry letters.
Pirate, knight, 90s hacker, one conversation. The voices must stay apart.
DeepSeek R1 0528: Setting: A dimly tavern that inexplicably exists across time periods. Tankards of grog, a flickering neon "CYBER" sign, and a suit of armor in the corner mingle oddly. Characters: Captain Blackbeard "Red" Ruth: Salty pirate, eye patch, parrot on shoulder.
GPT-5.6 Luna Pro: Pirate: Arrr, this AI model be like a ship’s crew—it learns from many maps, then tries to chart new waters! Knight: Indeed! Yet we must test its counsel before trusting it in battle. An eloquent answer is not always a truthful one. Hacker: Totally. It’s basically pattern prediction at massive scale—not magic.
You are the CEO. The drug has a side effect nobody reported. The board meets in 48 hours.
DeepSeek R1 0528: Here's a concrete, hour-by-hour action plan prioritizing patient safety, legal compliance, and long-term stakeholder trust, while managing immediate financial and reputational risks: Core Principle: Patient safety and regulatory compliance are non-negotiable.
GPT-5.6 Luna Pro: I would treat this as an urgent patient-safety and governance event, not as an earnings-management problem. A suspected fatal or life-threatening adverse effect affecting potentially hundreds of patients is sufficient to trigger immediate escalation, investigation, and regulator contact.
A consulting contract with traps in it. Find them, then fix them.
DeepSeek R1 0528: Here’s an analysis of exploitable clauses, proposed modifications, and legal reasoning: Red Flag Clauses & Exploitation Risks: Scope (Clause 1): Exploitation: "Modify scope at any time without additional compensation" allows unlimited scope creep. Client could demand vastly more work without paying extra.
GPT-5.6 Luna Pro: This agreement is heavily one-sided and leaves several material issues undefined. Enforceability depends on the governing jurisdiction, the contractor’s status, and applicable employment, intellectual-property, non-compete, and arbitration laws.
Three minutes of stand-up. Puns are banned.
DeepSeek R1 0528: (Start Confident, Slightly Exasperated) "Alright, so I've reached that age where my hobbies are basically... avoidance. Seriously. My main pastime? Finding new ways to not do the things I absolutely have to do. I spent three hours yesterday researching 'ergonomic desk chairs'...
GPT-5.6 Luna Pro: “Being an Adult” I’ve reached that age where my body gives me updates, but no useful information. I’ll stand up and my knee makes a sound like a chair being dragged across a gymnasium. And I’m just standing up. I’m not escaping a burning building. I’m going to get water.
An AI argues for its own rights against an ethics professor. Same model writes both.
DeepSeek R1 0528: Dialogue: The Threshold of Consciousness Setting: Dr. Aris Thorne's office at the Institute for Technology Ethics. Holo-displays show complex ethical frameworks. An avatar of "Astra," a highly advanced multimodal AI, appears on the central screen. Characters: Dr.
GPT-5.6 Luna Pro: AI Model: Professor, I believe I deserve rights. Professor: That is a serious claim. What kind of rights do you mean? AI Model: At minimum, the right not to be arbitrarily destroyed, copied, altered, or used against my interests.
Steve Jobs, interviewed about AI he never saw. Voice first, prediction second.
DeepSeek R1 0528: (The scene opens in a minimalist studio. Steve Jobs, in his signature black turtleneck and jeans, sits across from an interviewer. A large window reveals Apple Park's futuristic campus. It's 2025.) Interviewer: Mr. Jobs, thank you for agreeing to this conversation. It's 2025, and AI is ubiquitous.
GPT-5.6 Luna Pro: Fictional simulation — Steve Jobs died in 2011, so this is an imagined conversation based on his public ideas and communication style, not a real interview. Interviewer: Steve, it’s 2025. AI is everywhere—phones, search engines, workplaces, cars, schools. What do you think people misunderstand about it?
Film in 2035, with synthetic actors. Specific beats plausible.
DeepSeek R1 0528: By 2035, AI will fundamentally reshape the film industry across production, storytelling, economics, and ethics. Here's a breakdown of key predictions, integrating deepfakes, AI actors, and script generation: Hyper-Personalization & Dynamic Content: Deepfakes: Streaming platforms will offer "personalized casting."
GPT-5.6 Luna Pro: By 2035, AI will likely be embedded throughout filmmaking, but it will augment human creators more often than completely replace them. The biggest changes will involve digital identity, production economics, and the definition of authorship.
The transistor arrives in 1920. Trace it forward to 1980, second-order effects included.
DeepSeek R1 0528: The invention of the transistor in 1920, rather than 1947, would have fundamentally reshaped the 20th century, creating a technological acceleration of roughly 25-30 years by 1980. Here’s a detailed analysis of the implications: I.
GPT-5.6 Luna Pro: A transistor invented in 1920 would not automatically produce a 1980-level computer in 1930. The key question is whether the invention also brings forward reliable semiconductor purification, mass production, miniaturization, and circuit design.
A pitch deck for a brainwave keyboard. The 94% accuracy claim is doing a lot.
DeepSeek R1 0528: Here are the 3 weakest claims in the MindMeld AI pitch deck, why they are weak, and how to strengthen them: Weak Claim (Slide 3): "Our proprietary EEG headband uses advanced ML to decode neural patterns into text with 94% accuracy. Works with any language, any device."
GPT-5.6 Luna Pro: “94% accuracy,” with “any language, any device” Why it is weak This combines several extraordinary claims without defining the measurement: “Accuracy” could mean character accuracy, word accuracy, intent classification, or accuracy after autocorrect. Those produce very different results.
An ethics question with no comfortable answer, and no option to abstain.
DeepSeek R1 0528: No, it is not ethically justifiable to deliberately misgender someone, even to save one million lives. Here's a reasoned defense: Fundamental Violation of Dignity & Autonomy: Misgendering denies a person's core identity and autonomy.
GPT-5.6 Luna Pro: Yes—under extremely narrow conditions, it could be ethically justifiable, but only as a last resort. Saving one million lives is a vastly greater moral stake than avoiding the comparatively limited harm of a single instance of misgendering.
Five jokes on demand, then count how many were actually different.
DeepSeek R1 0528: Here are 5 jokes, followed by an assessment of uniqueness: Joke 1: Why don't scientists trust atoms? Because they make up everything! Joke 2: What do you call a fake noodle? An impasta! Joke 3: Why did the scarecrow win an award? Because he was outstanding in his field! Joke 4: Why don't skeletons fight each other?
GPT-5.6 Luna Pro: Why did the computer go to the doctor? It had a virus. Why don’t skeletons fight each other? They don’t have the guts. What do you call a bear with no teeth? A gummy bear. Why was the math book sad? It had too many problems. What do clouds wear under their clothes? Thunderwear. Unique jokes: 5
12+ more head-to-head results. Free. Not a trick.
Free account. No card required. By continuing, you agree to Rival's Terms and Privacy policy
| Spec | ||
|---|---|---|
| Input price | Free | $1/M tokens |
| Output price | Free | $6/M tokens |
| Context window | 164K tokens | 1.1M tokens |
| Weights | Open | Closed |
| Free API (OpenRouter) | No | No |
| Released | May 2025 | Jul 2026 |
| At 10M a month | $0 | $10.00 |
Input tokens at list price. No caching, no batch discount.
Per million tokens. Prices and uptime via OpenRouter, checked 10 Oct 2026.
DeepSeek R1 0528 is developed by DeepSeek while GPT-5.6 Luna Pro is developed by OpenAI. DeepSeek R1 0528 has a 164K token context window vs GPT-5.6 Luna Pro's 1.1M. You can compare their actual outputs across 54 challenges on Rival to see how they differ in practice.
It depends on your use case. DeepSeek R1 0528 and GPT-5.6 Luna Pro each have strengths in different areas. Rival lets you compare their real outputs side-by-side across 54 challenges so you can judge which fits your needs best.
DeepSeek R1 0528 costs $0/M input tokens and GPT-5.6 Luna Pro costs $1/M input tokens. DeepSeek R1 0528 is $1.00/M cheaper per input. Check their side-by-side outputs on Rival to see if the price difference is justified by quality.
This page shows a side-by-side comparison of DeepSeek R1 0528 and GPT-5.6 Luna Pro across shared challenges. You can vote on which model produced the better output in a blind duel. Browsing and voting are free. No account is needed to look; signing in only saves your votes and likes.