Agentic
Not comparable- Claude 4.1 Opus
- 45.1
- Estimated · #95/151
- Claude Mythos 5
- Not ranked
- Basis
- BenchAlign lane · 1 vs 4 public rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
Claude 4.1 Opus vs Claude Mythos 5
Updated September 4, 2026. Public scores include evidence status and uncertainty. They are not guarantees for a specific workload.
Decision reading
At least one model is not scored in the current public ranking lane, so the page does not name an overall quality winner.
1 results are shared. Category rows resting on Estimated evidence or different benchmark sets are marked directional and do not name a winner.
Share or export
Which one for your work
Recommendations appear only when a shared evidence basis or an explicit operating constraint supports the call. Secondary and unsupported use cases stay disclosed below the initial list.
Long documents
Prompts that approach the documented context limit
Claude Mythos 5
Claude Mythos 5 has the larger documented context window.
Confidence: documented
Chat turn cost
1K fresh input + 500 output tokens
Claude Mythos 5
Claude Mythos 5 has the lower estimated token cost for this stated workload. Costs use the listed standard API rates.
Confidence: listed-rates
Show secondary and unsupported calls
Repository review cost
50K fresh input + 3K output tokens
Claude Mythos 5
Claude Mythos 5 has the lower estimated token cost for this stated workload. Costs use the listed standard API rates.
Confidence: listed-rates
Coding work
Code generation, repair, and software-engineering tasks
Not enough matched evidence
Claude Mythos 5 is not ranked on the public lane for coding, so no winner is named for coding.
Confidence: limited
Agentic work
Tool use, computer use, and multi-step task completion
Not enough matched evidence
Claude Mythos 5 is not ranked on the public lane for agentic, so no winner is named for agentic.
Confidence: limited
Cache-heavy agent loop cost
200K cached + 20K fresh input + 10K output tokens
Not enough matched evidence
The page does not recommend a cost winner because at least one model cannot fit the stated workload in one request. Claude 4.1 Opus does not fit this workload in one request. Claude 4.1 Opus has no published cached-input rate, so cached tokens use its listed input rate.
Confidence: rate-fallback
What is actually comparable
Shared results can support a head-to-head reading. Results present for only one model describe coverage, not superiority.
1 Claude 4.1 Opus only
1 Shared
14 Claude Mythos 5 only
- Shared results
- 1
- Claude 4.1 Opus only
- 1
- Claude Mythos 5 only
- 14
- Like-for-like categories
- 0 / 8
Category results, on a stated basis
Each row shows the public-lane category score for both models: the BenchAlign lane for agentic, coding, and knowledge, and the weighted public rows elsewhere, with the same rank each model page reports. A row is like-for-like only when both scores rest on Supported evidence or the same weighted set. Directional and not-comparable rows remain visible, but they never receive a winner.
Coding
Not comparable- Claude 4.1 Opus
- 45.1
- Estimated · #111/183
- Claude Mythos 5
- Not ranked
- Basis
- BenchAlign lane · 1 vs 3 public rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
Reasoning
Not comparable- Claude 4.1 Opus
- Not ranked
- Claude Mythos 5
- Not ranked
- Basis
- Provisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
Knowledge
Not comparable- Claude 4.1 Opus
- Not ranked
- Claude Mythos 5
- Not ranked
- Basis
- BenchAlign lane · 0 vs 3 public rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
Math
Not comparable- Claude 4.1 Opus
- Not ranked
- Claude Mythos 5
- Not ranked
- Basis
- Provisional lane · 0 vs 1 weighted rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
Multilingual
Not comparable- Claude 4.1 Opus
- Not ranked
- Claude Mythos 5
- Not ranked
- Basis
- Provisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
Multimodal
Not comparable- Claude 4.1 Opus
- Not ranked
- Claude Mythos 5
- 85.1
- Unranked · 3 rankable rows
- Basis
- Provisional lane · 0 vs 1 weighted rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
Instruction following
Not comparable- Claude 4.1 Opus
- Not ranked
- Claude Mythos 5
- Not ranked
- Basis
- Provisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
| Category | Claude 4.1 Opus | Claude Mythos 5 | Basis | Reading |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Agentic | 45.1Estimated · #95/151 | Not ranked | Not comparableBenchAlign lane · 1 vs 4 public rows | Not comparable |
| Coding | 45.1Estimated · #111/183 | Not ranked | Not comparableBenchAlign lane · 1 vs 3 public rows | Not comparable |
| Reasoning | Not ranked | Not ranked | Not comparableProvisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows | Not comparable |
| Knowledge | Not ranked | Not ranked | Not comparableBenchAlign lane · 0 vs 3 public rows | Not comparable |
| Math | Not ranked | Not ranked | Not comparableProvisional lane · 0 vs 1 weighted rows | Not comparable |
| Multilingual | Not ranked | Not ranked | Not comparableProvisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows | Not comparable |
| Multimodal | Not ranked | 85.1Unranked · 3 rankable rows | Not comparableProvisional lane · 0 vs 1 weighted rows | Not comparable |
| Instruction following | Not ranked | Not ranked | Not comparableProvisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows | Not comparable |
Ranks count the models scored in each category’s lane, so the agentic, coding, and knowledge denominators (BenchAlign) differ from the provisional-lane categories. Unranked scores sit on the lane’s scale but never name a winner. Like-for-like rows within 0.5 points read as a practical tie.
Shape of the matched evidence
Only shared public evidence is shown. Sparse evidence stays a ruled list rather than being closed into a radar shape.
Too few matched category axes support a radar. The ruled list below shows only shared benchmark results; positions use each benchmark’s normalized display scale when available.
SWE-bench Verified
Coding
Claude 4.1 Opus: 74.5%Claude Mythos 5: 95.5%Normalized gap 21.0Claude 4.1 Opus source Claude Mythos 5 source
What each workload costs
Three fixed token mixes turn per-token rates into comparable decisions. Each scenario states context fit and whether cached input had to fall back to the published list-input rate.
Chat turn
1K fresh input + 500 output tokens
- Claude 4.1 Opus
- $0.0525
- Fits in one request
- Claude Mythos 5
- $0.035
- Fits in one request
Claude Mythos 5 has the lower modeled cost
Costs use the listed standard API rates.
Repository review
50K fresh input + 3K output tokens
- Claude 4.1 Opus
- $0.975
- Fits in one request
- Claude Mythos 5
- $0.65
- Fits in one request
Claude Mythos 5 has the lower modeled cost
Costs use the listed standard API rates.
Cache-heavy agent loop
200K cached + 20K fresh input + 10K output tokens
- Claude 4.1 Opus
- $4.05
- Does not fit in one request
- Cached input priced at the published list-input rate
- Claude Mythos 5
- $0.9
- Fits in one request
Claude 4.1 Opus does not fit this workload in one request. Claude 4.1 Opus has no published cached-input rate, so cached tokens use its listed input rate.
Specification differences
Sourced differences are shown directly. Missing facts stay explicit instead of being inferred from a model name or family.
SpecificationClaude 4.1 OpusClaude Mythos 5
Context window
Maximum documented context; output-token limits may be lower.
Claude 4.1 Opus
200K
Claude Mythos 5
API model ID
Claude 4.1 Opus
Not sourced
Claude Mythos 5
claude-mythos-5
Anthropic model overviewCached-input rate
A missing cached-input rate falls back to the listed input rate only in the stated workload estimate.
Claude 4.1 Opus
Not published
Claude Mythos 5
$1 per 1M cached input tokens
Claude API pricingDocumented inputs
Claude 4.1 Opus
Not sourced
Claude Mythos 5
text, image
Anthropic model overviewDocumented outputs
Claude 4.1 Opus
Not sourced
Claude Mythos 5
Provider availability
Claude 4.1 Opus
Not sourced
Claude Mythos 5
Limited Access · Claude API
Anthropic model overviewReasoning profile
Claude 4.1 Opus
Non-Reasoning
Claude Mythos 5
Reasoning
Weight access
Claude 4.1 Opus
Proprietary
Claude Mythos 5
Proprietary
License
Claude 4.1 Opus
Proprietary
Claude Mythos 5
Proprietary
Release date
Claude 4.1 Opus
2025-08-01
Claude Mythos 5
2026-06-09
If you already use one of these models
- Deployment change
- Both entries list Anthropic as the provider. Confirm endpoint, model ID, limits, and feature support before switching.
- Quality signal
- At least one model is not scored in the current public ranking lane, so the page does not name an overall quality winner.
- Workload cost
- Repository review: $0.975 vs $0.65. Cache-heavy agent loop: $4.05 vs $0.9.
- Context tradeoff
- Claude Mythos 5 has the larger documented window (1M).
Run the same representative tasks against both endpoints before changing production traffic.
Benchmark evidence
The full public result ledger is available for audit without forcing a wide desktop table onto a phone.
Browse raw public benchmark evidence16 rows
Agentic
JobBench
Claude 4.1 Opus21.9%SourceClaude Mythos 5—Not directly comparable
Terminal-Bench 2.0
Claude 4.1 Opus—Claude Mythos 588%SourceNot directly comparable
OSWorld-Verified
Claude 4.1 Opus—Claude Mythos 585%SourceNot directly comparable
BrowseComp
Claude 4.1 Opus—Claude Mythos 588%SourceNot directly comparable
CyberGym
Claude 4.1 Opus—Claude Mythos 583.8%SourceNot directly comparable
Coding
Knowledge
Math
USAMO 2026
Claude 4.1 Opus—Claude Mythos 597.6%SourceNot directly comparable
Multilingual
SWE Multilingual
Claude 4.1 Opus—Claude Mythos 592.2%SourceNot directly comparable
Multimodal
Frequently asked questions
Which is better, Claude 4.1 Opus or Claude Mythos 5?
At least one model is not scored in the current public ranking lane, so the page does not name an overall quality winner. The page therefore keeps the decision tied to the specific documented workload.
Which is better for coding, Claude 4.1 Opus or Claude Mythos 5?
Claude Mythos 5 is not ranked on the public lane for coding, so no winner is named for coding.
Which is better for agentic tasks, Claude 4.1 Opus or Claude Mythos 5?
Claude Mythos 5 is not ranked on the public lane for agentic tasks, so no winner is named for agentic tasks.
Which costs less, Claude 4.1 Opus or Claude Mythos 5?
For the stated presets, chat costs $0.0525 on Claude 4.1 Opus and $0.035 on Claude Mythos 5; repository review costs $0.975 and $0.65; the cache-heavy agent loop costs $4.05 and $0.9. Claude 4.1 Opus does not fit this workload in one request. Claude 4.1 Opus has no published cached-input rate, so cached tokens use its listed input rate.
Which has the larger context window, Claude 4.1 Opus or Claude Mythos 5?
Claude Mythos 5 has the larger documented context window: 1M, compared with 200K.
Related comparisons
Last updated September 4, 2026
Watch Claude 4.1 Opus vs Claude Mythos 5
One weekly email when material rank, price, or benchmark evidence changes make this matchup worth revisiting.
Read a sample issueJoin 2,000+ readers.