ZMIME
Comparison · 3 models · Updated Oct 4, 2026

Mistral Small 3.2 vs GPT-6 Luna vs Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite comes out ahead, 85 to 78 and 64 on our weighted score, though Mistral Small 3.2 is 14% cheaper per token.

  1. Mistral AI

    Mistral Small 3.2

    Released Jun 20, 2025

    64/100
    • ECI131.7
    • Price$0.10 / $0.30
    • Context128K
  2. OpenAI

    GPT-6 Luna

    Released Sep 22, 2026

    78/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.10 / $0.50
    • Context1.05M
  3. Our pick

    Google

    Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite

    Released Jun 17, 2025

    85/100
    • ECI133.9
    • Price$0.10 / $0.40
    • Context1.05M
01 — Verdict

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite is our pick

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite is the better all-round choice, scoring 85/100 against GPT-6 Luna (78) and Mistral Small 3.2 (64). It leads on inputs & features. Mistral Small 3.2 wins on price. The score weighs price 50%, inputs & features 30%, context window 20%. None of the shared benchmarks cover every model here yet, so capability is left out of this verdict.

  • CapabilityNot enough dataNo independent benchmark covers every model here yet
  • Lowest priceMistral Small 3.2Mistral Small 3.2 $0.15 · Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite $0.175 · GPT-6 Luna $0.20 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextGPT-6 Luna and Gemini 2.5 Flash-LiteGPT-6 Luna 1,050,000 · Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite 1,048,576 · Mistral Small 3.2 128,000 tokens
  • Widest inputsGemini 2.5 Flash-LiteMistral Small 3.2: Text, Images · GPT-6 Luna: Text, Images, PDFs · Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: Text, Images, PDFs, Audio, Video
  • Self-hostingMistral Small 3.2Publishes downloadable weights
How the score is built
MeasureWeightMistral Small 3.2GPT-6 LunaGemini 2.5 Flash-Lite
Price50%898386
Inputs & features30%5080100
Context window20%246161
Overall100%64/10078/10085/100

Left out because at least one model lacks the data: capability. The remaining weights were rescaled.

02 — Side by side

Every spec in one table

Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.

Mistral Small 3.2 vs GPT-6 Luna vs Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite specifications side by side
SpecificationMistral Small 3.2Mistral AIGPT-6 LunaOpenAIGemini 2.5 Flash-LiteGoogle
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)131.7—133.9 (best)
ECI rank#123 of 148—#118 of 148 (best)
GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions49.1%90.5% (best)—
FrontierMath Tiers 1–3Research-level mathematics—79.0%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics30.3%98.9% (best)—
SimpleQA VerifiedShort factual questions—41.4%—
Price per million tokens
Input$0.10$0.10$0.10
Output$0.30 (best)$0.50$0.40
Cached input—$0.01$0.01
Blended (3:1)$0.15 (best)$0.20$0.175
Long-context rateSame rateOver 272K: $0.20 / $0.75Same rate
Price sourceOfficial Mistral APIOfficial OpenAI APIOfficial Google API
Limits
Context window128,000 tokens1,050,000 tokens (best)1,048,576 tokens
Max output16,384 tokens128,000 tokens (best)65,536 tokens
Inputs and features
TextYesYesYes
ImagesYesYesYes
PDFsNoYesYes
AudioNoNoYes
VideoNoNoYes
ReasoningNoYeslow · medium · high · xhigh · maxYes
Tool callingYesYesYes
Structured outputNoYesYes
Availability
WeightsOpenProprietaryProprietary
API model IDmistral-small-2506gpt-6-lunagemini-2.5-flash-lite
API providers624 (best)20
ReleasedJun 20, 2025Sep 22, 2026Jun 17, 2025
Knowledge cutoffMar 2025May 18, 2026Jan 2025
03 — Cost

What would a month cost?

Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.

  • Mistral Small 3.2$1.60
  • GPT-6 Luna$2.00
  • Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite$1.80
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: Mistral Small 3.2, GPT-6 Luna or Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite?

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite is the better all-round choice, scoring 85/100 against GPT-6 Luna (78) and Mistral Small 3.2 (64). It leads on inputs & features. Mistral Small 3.2 wins on price. The score weighs price 50%, inputs & features 30%, context window 20%. None of the shared benchmarks cover every model here yet, so capability is left out of this verdict.

Which is cheaper, Mistral Small 3.2, GPT-6 Luna or Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite?

Mistral Small 3.2 is cheaper at $0.10 input / $0.30 output per million tokens (official Mistral API price). Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite costs $0.10 input / $0.40 output per million tokens (official Google API price); GPT-6 Luna costs $0.10 input / $0.50 output per million tokens (official OpenAI API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.15 per million tokens for Mistral Small 3.2 versus $0.175 for Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite (1.2× as much) and $0.20 for GPT-6 Luna (1.3× as much).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

There is no independent benchmark that covers all three models yet. Mistral Small 3.2 has an ECI of 131.7, GPT-6 Luna has not been scored yet and Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite has an ECI of 133.9.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Mistral Small 3.2, GPT-6 Luna and Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. Test both on a sample of your own tasks. All three support tool calling for agent workflows.

Which has the bigger context window?

GPT-6 Luna and Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite have the largest context windows (1,050,000 and 1,048,576 tokens), against 128,000 for Mistral Small 3.2. Maximum output per response: Mistral Small 3.2 up to 16,384, GPT-6 Luna up to 128,000, Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite up to 65,536 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

Mistral Small 3.2 accepts text and images; GPT-6 Luna accepts text, images and PDFs; Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite accepts text, images, PDFs, audio and video. Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite handles the widest range of inputs.

Are any of these open source?

Mistral Small 3.2 publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; GPT-6 Luna and Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite is proprietary.

Which is newer?

GPT-6 Luna is the newest, released Sep 22, 2026. Mistral Small 3.2 came out Jun 20, 2025; Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite came out Jun 17, 2025. Knowledge cutoff: Mistral Small 3.2 Mar 2025, GPT-6 Luna May 18, 2026, Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite Jan 2025.

How do you decide the winner?

Each model gets a 0–100 score on capability (50%, independent benchmark results); price (25%, blended price per million tokens (3 input : 1 output), log scale); inputs & features (15%, image, PDF, audio and video input, tool calling, structured output and reasoning); context window (10%, maximum tokens per request, log scale). Dimensions missing for any model are dropped and the remaining weights rescaled, so every model is judged on the same evidence. Specs and prices come from public model listings and the labs’ own API pages; capability scores come from independent benchmark runs. Data updated Oct 4, 2026.