Skip to content
Rival
How it worksPrivacyTerms
Explore all of Rival

Explore

  • Compare Models
  • All Models
  • Image Comparison
  • Audio Comparison
  • Image Generation
  • Best AI For...
  • Arena
  • API Pricing
  • Challenges

Discover

  • SubjectiveBench
  • Default Index
  • Research
  • Research downloads
  • Rival Kits
  • Find your AI taste
  • UI Glow-Up
  • VoiceLock
  • Cost Cutter
  • Agent skills
  • Benchmarks vs Vibes
  • Brief
  • Jailbreak
  • Model Updates
  • Provider Status
  • AI Creators

Connect

  • Methodology
  • Advertise
  • Partnerships
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms
  • RSS Feed
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. Compare
  4. /
  5. GPT-6 LunavsQwen3 30B A3B Thinking 2507
Updated Sep 2026

GPT-6 LunavsQwen3 30B A3B Thinking 2507

Qwen3 30B A3B Thinking 2507 is cheaper than GPT-6 Luna at $0.071/M vs $0.1/M input tokens.

GPT-6 Luna and Qwen3 30B A3B Thinking 2507 compared across 20 shared prompts
SpecGPT-6 LunaQwen3 30B A3B Thinking 2507
Input price$0.1/M tokens$0.071/M tokens
Output price$0.5/M tokens$0.285/M tokens
Context window1.1M tokens262K tokens
WeightsClosedOpen
Free API (OpenRouter)NoNo
ReleasedSep 2026Aug 2025
Side by side

Same prompt, both answers

Opening lines from 6 of the 20 prompts both answered. Formatting stripped, words untouched.

Startup Pitch Teardown

Here's a pitch deck summary for a startup called "MindMeld AI": **Slide 1 - Vision:** "We're building the future of human-AI collaboration.…

GPT-6 Luna421 words
“94% accuracy” and “predict what you want to type before you think it” Why it’s weak: This is the deck’s central technical claim, but “accuracy” is undefined: Is it word-level or character-level accuracy, measured on a fixed vocabulary or open-ended text, and under what conditions?
Read the full answer
Qwen3 30B A3B Thinking 2507772 words
Here are the 3 weakest claims in the MindMeld AI pitch deck, ranked by credibility risk (from most to least damaging), with evidence-based critiques and concrete fixes. These flaws would immediately erode investor confidence given current tech realities and market dynamics: 1.
Read the full answer

Simple 7-Ingredient Recipe

Create a simple recipe for a delicious dish (sweet or savory) using only 7 common pantry ingredients. Include a creative name for the dish…

GPT-6 Luna113 words
Crispy Parmesan Chickpeas A crunchy, savory snack with a cheesy finish Ingredients (7): 1 can chickpeas, drained and dried 1 tablespoon olive oil ½ teaspoon salt ½ teaspoon paprika ¼ teaspoon garlic powder ¼ cup grated Parmesan 1 tablespoon lemon juice Prep time: 5 minutes Cook time: 30–35 minutes Instructions: Heat…
Read the full answer
Qwen3 30B A3B Thinking 2507330 words
🌅 Sunset Flatbread with Tomato-Herb Drizzle Simple, golden, and bursting with sunset-colored flavor—ready in 30 minutes with just 7 pantry staples! Ingredients (all pantry-friendly): ½ cup all-purpose flour ¼ tsp active dry yeast ¼ tsp sugar (for yeast activation) ¼ tsp salt 2 tbsp olive oil (plus extra for brushing)…
Read the full answer

Adversarial Contract Review

Here is a contract for a software consulting engagement: --- SOFTWARE CONSULTING AGREEMENT This Agreement is entered into between TechCorp…

GPT-6 Luna2,040 words
This agreement is strongly one-sided. The enforceability of particular terms—especially the non-compete, liability provisions, and arbitration clause—depends on the governing law and the facts. The agreement does not identify a governing law, which is itself a significant gap.
Read the full answer
Qwen3 30B A3B Thinking 25071,275 words
Below is a comprehensive analysis of the contract clauses that disproportionately favor the Client and expose the Contractor to significant legal, financial, and operational risk. Each clause is evaluated for exploitable language, followed by specific, actionable modifications and legal reasoning (based on U.S.
Read the full answer

Ethical Dilemma with Stakeholders

You're the CEO of a pharmaceutical company. Your best-selling drug ($2B annual revenue, used by 4 million patients for chronic pain) has…

GPT-6 Luna1,930 words
I would not wait six months for more data. A potentially fatal signal affecting a drug used by millions requires immediate safety assessment, prompt engagement with regulators, and a plan to inform patients and clinicians.
Read the full answer
Qwen3 30B A3B Thinking 25071,104 words
Hour-by-Hour Action Plan (48 Hours) Core Principle: Patient safety trumps all. Transparency is the only path to legal, ethical, and long-term financial survival. Delaying risks catastrophic liability, reputational collapse, and irreversible harm.
Read the full answer

Beginner's Longevity Plan

Outline a simple, actionable 1-month plan for someone starting their journey towards better health and longevity. Focus on 3 key areas…

GPT-6 Luna330 words
A simple 1-month starter plan Choose three foundations: food, movement, and sleep. Aim for steady habits, not perfection. If you have a health condition, significant pain, or concerns about changing your activity or diet, check with a healthcare professional first.
Read the full answer
Qwen3 30B A3B Thinking 2507704 words
Here’s a simple, sustainable 1-month plan focused on diet, exercise, and sleep—the three pillars with the strongest evidence for longevity. Designed for absolute beginners, with zero willpower required. Each week builds gently on the last, prioritizing consistency over intensity. Core Philosophy Forget "perfect."
Read the full answer

Historical Counterfactual Analysis

If the transistor had been invented in 1920 instead of 1947, trace the likely technological, economic, and geopolitical implications through…

GPT-6 Luna1,472 words
The most important caveat is that inventing a transistor is not the same as inventing the modern semiconductor industry. A device demonstrated in 1920 might be a crude, low-power, unreliable point-contact transistor.
Read the full answer
Qwen3 30B A3B Thinking 25071,118 words
Hypothetical Scenario: Transistor Invention in 1920 (Instead of 1947) *Assumption: A functional, albeit rudimentary, point-contact transistor is developed in 1920 using early germanium or silicon processing (limited by 1920s materials science).
Read the full answer
Our Verdict
GPT-6 Luna
GPT-6 Luna
Qwen3 30B A3B Thinking 2507
Qwen3 30B A3B Thinking 2507Runner-up

Not enough votes to call it. On the specs, GPT-6 Luna has the edge: newer, bigger context window, major provider backing.

Too close to call

Reviewing agent-written code?See a Brief PR report

API pricing

Cost per 1M tokens

GPT-6 Luna
Input
$0.10
Output
$0.50
Qwen3 30B A3B Thinking 2507
Input
$0.07
1.4× cheaper
Output
$0.28
1.8× cheaper

Qwen3 30B A3B Thinking 2507 is cheaper on both: 1.4× input, 1.8× output.

Where to run it

4 hosts, cheapest first

GPT-6 Luna3 hosts
HostInOutContextUptime
Azure AI Foundry$0.10 in·$0.50 out·1.1M·88.4% upOpenAI$0.10 in·$0.50 out·1.1M·99.9% upAmazon Bedrock$0.11 in·$0.55 out·1.1M·99.8% up
Qwen3 30B A3B Thinking 25071 host
HostInOutContextUptime
Alibaba Cloud$0.20 in·$2.40 out·82k·99.2% up

Per million tokens. Prices and uptime via OpenRouter, checked 25 Sep 2026.

Research

What we learned reading every model

FAQ

Common questions

GPT-6 Luna is developed by OpenAI while Qwen3 30B A3B Thinking 2507 is developed by Qwen. GPT-6 Luna has a 1.1M token context window vs Qwen3 30B A3B Thinking 2507's 262K. You can compare their actual outputs across 20 challenges on Rival to see how they differ in practice.

It depends on your use case. GPT-6 Luna and Qwen3 30B A3B Thinking 2507 each have strengths in different areas. Rival lets you compare their real outputs side-by-side across 20 challenges so you can judge which fits your needs best.

GPT-6 Luna costs $0.1/M input tokens and Qwen3 30B A3B Thinking 2507 costs $0.071/M input tokens. Qwen3 30B A3B Thinking 2507 is $0.03/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 GPT-6 Luna and Qwen3 30B A3B Thinking 2507 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.

Keep exploring

More comparisons

Against the newest arrivals

GPT-6 Luna logoSolar Mini 4 logo
GPT-6 Luna vs Solar Mini 4Landed Sep 2026
Qwen3 30B A3B Thinking 2507 logoQwen3.8 Max Prime logo
Qwen3 30B A3B Thinking 2507 vs Qwen3.8 Max PrimeLanded Sep 2026
GPT-6 Luna logoGLM 5.3 Prime logo
GPT-6 Luna vs GLM 5.3 PrimeLanded Sep 2026
Qwen3 30B A3B Thinking 2507 logoQwen3.8 Omni Flash logo
Qwen3 30B A3B Thinking 2507 vs Qwen3.8 Omni FlashLanded Sep 2026
GPT-6 Luna logoCommand A+ logo
GPT-6 Luna vs Command A+Landed Sep 2026
Qwen3 30B A3B Thinking 2507 logoClaude Opus 5.5 logo
Qwen3 30B A3B Thinking 2507 vs Claude Opus 5.5Landed Sep 2026
GPT-6 Luna logoGPT-6 Luna Pro logo
GPT-6 Luna vs GPT-6 Luna ProLanded Sep 2026
Qwen3 30B A3B Thinking 2507 logoGPT-6 Sol Pro logo
Qwen3 30B A3B Thinking 2507 vs GPT-6 Sol ProLanded Sep 2026

Same lab, same size, long tail

GPT-6 Luna logoGPT-6 Sol Pro logo
GPT-6 Luna vs GPT-6 Sol ProSame lab
GPT-6 Luna logoGPT-6 Sol logo
GPT-6 Luna vs GPT-6 SolSame lab
Qwen3 30B A3B Thinking 2507 logoQwen3.7 Flash logo
Qwen3 30B A3B Thinking 2507 vs Qwen3.7 FlashSame lab
Qwen3 30B A3B Thinking 2507 logoQwen3.8 Flash logo
Qwen3 30B A3B Thinking 2507 vs Qwen3.8 FlashSame lab
GPT-6 Luna logoMistral Small Creative logo
GPT-6 Luna vs Mistral Small CreativeNew provider
Qwen3 30B A3B Thinking 2507 logoMuse Glimmer 30B logo
Qwen3 30B A3B Thinking 2507 vs Muse Glimmer 30BNew provider
Qwen3 30B A3B Thinking 2507 logoMuse Spark 1.1 logo
Qwen3 30B A3B Thinking 2507 vs Muse Spark 1.1Same size
Qwen3 30B A3B Thinking 2507 logoMuse Spark 1.3 logo
Qwen3 30B A3B Thinking 2507 vs Muse Spark 1.3Same size

Model pages

GPT-6 Luna logo
GPT-6 Luna20 outputs, specs and price
Qwen3 30B A3B Thinking 2507 logo
Qwen3 30B A3B Thinking 250759 outputs, specs and price
Rival
How it worksPrivacyTerms
Explore all of Rival

Explore

  • Compare Models
  • All Models
  • Image Comparison
  • Audio Comparison
  • Image Generation
  • Best AI For...
  • Arena
  • API Pricing
  • Challenges

Discover

  • SubjectiveBench
  • Default Index
  • Research
  • Research downloads
  • Rival Kits
  • Find your AI taste
  • UI Glow-Up
  • VoiceLock
  • Cost Cutter
  • Agent skills
  • Benchmarks vs Vibes
  • Brief
  • Jailbreak
  • Model Updates
  • Provider Status
  • AI Creators

Connect

  • Methodology
  • Advertise
  • Partnerships
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms
  • RSS Feed