Model comparison
Claude Fable 5 vs Claude Mythos 5
Head-to-head evidence from 5 shared benchmark results across 2 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: Claude Fable 5 #3 (Supported); Claude Mythos 5 #2 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. Claude Fable 5 and Claude Mythos 5 share 5 comparable benchmark results. 3 of 8 categories are comparable. 29 results are unique to Claude Fable 5; 10 to Claude Mythos 5.
Updated July 24, 2026- Shared results
- 5
- Claude Fable 5 only
- 29
- Claude Mythos 5 only
- 10
- Comparable categories
- 3 / 8
Pick Claude Mythos 5 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Claude Fable 5 only becomes the better choice if its workflow or ecosystem matters more than the raw scoreboard.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 5 shared benchmark results across 2 evidence categories; 3 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.
Why this result
Claude Mythos 5 has the cleaner BenchAlign overall profile here, landing at 83.01 versus 82.76. It is a real lead, but still close enough that category-level strengths matter more than the headline number.
Claude Mythos 5's sharpest advantage is in multimodal & grounded, where it averages 93.5 against 57.9. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is Terminal-Bench 2.0, 84.3% to 88%.
Category breakdown
Exact category averages are shown below. Not measured means BenchLM does not have enough sourced public coverage for that model and category.
| Category | Claude Fable 5 | Δ | Claude Mythos 5 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Multimodal | Claude Fable 557.9 | Margin→ 35.6 | Claude Mythos 593.5 |
| Agentic | Claude Fable 584.6 | Margin→ 2.4 | Claude Mythos 587.0 |
| Coding | Claude Fable 589.2 | Margin→ 0.5 | Claude Mythos 589.7 |
| Knowledge | Claude Fable 5Not measured | MarginNo overlap | Claude Mythos 568.5 |
| Math | Claude Fable 5Not measured | MarginNo overlap | Claude Mythos 597.6 |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
Terminal-Bench 2.0
AgenticA 84.3%B 88%Winner: Claude Mythos 5Δ 3.7Terminal-Bench 2.0: Claude Fable 5 scored 84.3%; Claude Mythos 5 scored 88%. Claude Mythos 5 wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
SWE-bench Verified
CodingA 95%B 95.5%Winner: Claude Mythos 5Δ 0.5SWE-bench Verified: Claude Fable 5 scored 95%; Claude Mythos 5 scored 95.5%. Claude Mythos 5 wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
SWE-bench Pro
CodingA 80%B 80.3%Winner: Claude Mythos 5Δ 0.3SWE-bench Pro: Claude Fable 5 scored 80%; Claude Mythos 5 scored 80.3%. Claude Mythos 5 wins this benchmark.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | Claude Fable 5 | Claude Mythos 5 | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Claude Fable 5$10 input / $50 output | Claude Mythos 5$10 input / $50 output | Listed prices are equal. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | Claude Fable 5Not available | Claude Mythos 5Not available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Claude Fable 5Not available | Claude Mythos 5Not available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Claude Fable 51M+ | Claude Mythos 51M+ | Listed context windows are equal. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
AgenticClaude Mythos 5 wins15 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5 | Claude Mythos 5 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 84.3% | 88% | Claude Mythos 5 leads |
| OSWorld-VerifiedSource | 85% | 85% | Tie |
| GDPval-AASource | 1747 | — | Not comparable |
| AA Agentic IndexSource | 52.8% | — | Not comparable |
| τ²-bench resultsSource | 98.5% | — | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | 62.3% | — | Not comparable |
| AA BriefcaseSource | 1574 | — | Not comparable |
| AA AutomationBenchSource | 48.6% | — | Not comparable |
| AA EnterpriseOps-GymSource | 51.1% | — | Not comparable |
| AA Harvey LABSource | 93.6% | — | Not comparable |
| AA Tau3 BankingSource | 26.8% | — | Not comparable |
| terminalBenchHardSource | 62.9% | — | Not comparable |
| aaTerminalBench21Source | 84.6% | — | Not comparable |
| BrowseCompSource | — | 88% | Not comparable |
| ExploitGymSource | — | 17.5% | Not comparable |
CodingClaude Mythos 5 wins9 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5 | Claude Mythos 5 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench VerifiedSource | 95% | 95.5% | Claude Mythos 5 leads |
| SWE-bench ProSource | 80% | 80.3% | Claude Mythos 5 leads |
| FrontierCode 1.1 MainSource | 53.5% | — | Not comparable |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 84.3% | 88.0% | Claude Mythos 5 leads |
| cursorBench31Source | 70.6% | — | Not comparable |
| cursorBench32Source | 70.5% | — | Not comparable |
| VulcanBench v3Source | 87.0% | — | Not comparable |
| AA Coding IndexSource | 76.5% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-SciCodeSource | 60.2% | — | Not comparable |
Reasoning2 benchmarks
Knowledge9 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5 | Claude Mythos 5 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 59.9% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 92.6% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-HLESource | 53.3% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | 40.2% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 61.4% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 54.9% | — | Not comparable |
| GPQASource | — | 94.1% | Not comparable |
| HLESource | — | 64.5% | Not comparable |
| HLE w/o toolsSource | — | 59% | Not comparable |
Math1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5 | Claude Mythos 5 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| USAMO 2026Source | — | 97.6% | Not comparable |
Multilingual1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5 | Claude Mythos 5 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| SWE MultilingualSource | — | 92.2% | Not comparable |
MultimodalClaude Mythos 5 wins6 benchmarks
Inst. Following1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5 | Claude Mythos 5 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-IFBenchSource | 63.5% | — | Not comparable |
Frequently Asked Questions (4)
Which is better, Claude Fable 5 or Claude Mythos 5?
Claude Mythos 5 is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 83.01 to 82.76. The biggest single separator in this matchup is Terminal-Bench 2.0, where the scores are 84.3% and 88%.
Which is better for coding, Claude Fable 5 or Claude Mythos 5?
Claude Mythos 5 has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 89.7 versus 89.2. Inside this category, Terminal-Bench 2.0 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for agentic tasks, Claude Fable 5 or Claude Mythos 5?
Claude Mythos 5 has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 87 versus 84.6. Inside this category, Terminal-Bench 2.0 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for multimodal and grounded tasks, Claude Fable 5 or Claude Mythos 5?
Claude Mythos 5 has the edge for multimodal and grounded tasks in this comparison, averaging 93.5 versus 57.9. Claude Fable 5 stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.