Model comparison
Claude Mythos 5 vs Claude Opus 5
Head-to-head evidence from 5 shared benchmark results across 3 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: Claude Mythos 5 #2 (Supported); Claude Opus 5 #1 (Estimated). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. Claude Mythos 5 and Claude Opus 5 share 5 comparable benchmark results. 4 of 8 categories are comparable. 10 results are unique to Claude Mythos 5; 74 to Claude Opus 5.
Updated July 24, 2026- Shared results
- 5
- Claude Mythos 5 only
- 10
- Claude Opus 5 only
- 74
- Comparable categories
- 4 / 8
Pick Claude Opus 5 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Claude Mythos 5 only becomes the better choice if multimodal & grounded is the priority.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 5 shared benchmark results across 3 evidence categories; 4 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.
Why this result
Claude Opus 5 has the cleaner BenchAlign overall profile here, landing at 85.88 versus 83.01. It is a real lead, but still close enough that category-level strengths matter more than the headline number.
Claude Opus 5's sharpest advantage is in agentic, where it averages 90.8 against 87. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is BrowseComp, 88% to 90.8%. Claude Mythos 5 does hit back in multimodal & grounded, so the answer changes if that is the part of the workload you care about most.
Claude Mythos 5 is also the more expensive model on tokens at $10.00 input / $50.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $5.00 input / $25.00 output per 1M tokens for Claude Opus 5. That is roughly 2.0x on output cost alone.
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 Mythos 5 | Δ | Claude Opus 5 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Multimodal | Claude Mythos 593.5 | Margin← 26.6 | Claude Opus 566.9 |
| Agentic | Claude Mythos 587.0 | Margin→ 3.8 | Claude Opus 590.8 |
| Knowledge | Claude Mythos 568.5 | Margin← 3.8 | Claude Opus 564.7 |
| Coding | Claude Mythos 589.7 | Margin← 0.2 | Claude Opus 589.5 |
| Reasoning | Claude Mythos 5Not measured | MarginNo overlap | Claude Opus 590.4 |
| Math | Claude Mythos 597.6 | MarginNo overlap | Claude Opus 5Not measured |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
BrowseComp
AgenticA 88%B 90.8%Winner: Claude Opus 5Δ 2.8BrowseComp: Claude Mythos 5 scored 88%; Claude Opus 5 scored 90.8%. Claude Opus 5 wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
SWE-bench Pro
CodingA 80.3%B 79.2%Winner: Claude Mythos 5Δ 1.1SWE-bench Pro: Claude Mythos 5 scored 80.3%; Claude Opus 5 scored 79.2%. Claude Mythos 5 wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
SWE-bench Verified
CodingA 95.5%B 96%Winner: Claude Opus 5Δ 0.5SWE-bench Verified: Claude Mythos 5 scored 95.5%; Claude Opus 5 scored 96%. Claude Opus 5 wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
HLE
KnowledgeA 64.5%B 64.7%Winner: Claude Opus 5Δ 0.2HLE: Claude Mythos 5 scored 64.5%; Claude Opus 5 scored 64.7%. Claude Opus 5 wins this benchmark.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | Claude Mythos 5 | Claude Opus 5 | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Claude Mythos 5$10 input / $50 output | Claude Opus 5$5 input / $25 output | Claude Opus 5 has the lower combined listed price. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | Claude Mythos 5Not available | Claude Opus 5Not available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Claude Mythos 5Not available | Claude Opus 5Not available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Claude Mythos 51M+ | Claude Opus 5Not available | A complete context comparison is not available. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
AgenticClaude Opus 5 wins27 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Mythos 5 | Claude Opus 5 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 88% | — | Not comparable |
| OSWorld-VerifiedSource | 85% | — | Not comparable |
| BrowseCompSource | 88% | 90.8% | Claude Opus 5 leads |
| ExploitGymSource | 17.5% | — | Not comparable |
| FrontierBench v0.1Source | — | 43.3% | Not comparable |
| HLE w/ toolsSource | — | 64.7% | Not comparable |
| DeepSearchQASource | — | 95.0% | Not comparable |
| DRACOSource | — | 88.6% | Not comparable |
| BrowseComp (10-agent, prerelease)Source | — | 93.6% | Not comparable |
| OSWorld 2.0Source | — | 70.6% | Not comparable |
| MCP AtlasSource | — | 85.8% | Not comparable |
| MCP-Atlas claim coverageSource | — | 89.1% | Not comparable |
| LAB all-pass (Anthropic harness)Source | — | 23.58% | Not comparable |
| LAB criterion-pass (Anthropic harness)Source | — | 93.74% | Not comparable |
| LAB all-pass (Harvey held-out)Source | — | 11.7% | Not comparable |
| LAB criterion-pass (Harvey held-out)Source | — | 94.1% | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | — | 1861 | Not comparable |
| Toolathlon-VerifiedSource | — | 80.6% | Not comparable |
| Toolathlon Verified Pass@3Source | — | 87.0% | Not comparable |
| Toolathlon Verified Pass³Source | — | 73.1% | Not comparable |
| Toolathlon Verified avg. turnsSource | — | 23.5 turns | Not comparable |
| AutomationBenchSource | — | 26.0% | Not comparable |
| AA Agentic IndexSource | — | 55.3% | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | — | 68.0% | Not comparable |
| AA Tau3 BankingSource | — | 30.3% | Not comparable |
| AA BriefcaseSource | — | 1720 | Not comparable |
| aaTerminalBench21Source | — | 89.1% | Not comparable |
CodingClaude Mythos 5 wins13 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Mythos 5 | Claude Opus 5 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench VerifiedSource | 95.5% | 96% | Claude Opus 5 leads |
| SWE-bench ProSource | 80.3% | 79.2% | Claude Mythos 5 leads |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 88.0% | — | Not comparable |
| SWE MultilingualSource | — | 89.5% | Not comparable |
| SWE MultimodalSource | — | 59.4% | Not comparable |
| deepSweSource | — | 68.8% | Not comparable |
| FrontierCode 1.1 MainSource | — | 53.4% | Not comparable |
| FrontierCode 1.1 ExtendedSource | — | 63.6% | Not comparable |
| ProgramBench (episode 1)Source | — | 83.0% | Not comparable |
| ProgramBenchSource | — | 93.0% | Not comparable |
| cursorBench32Source | — | 70.0% | Not comparable |
| AA Coding IndexSource | — | 78.0% | Not comparable |
| AA-SciCodeSource | — | 55.7% | Not comparable |
Reasoning5 benchmarks
KnowledgeClaude Mythos 5 wins22 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Mythos 5 | Claude Opus 5 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQASource | 94.1% | — | Not comparable |
| HLESource | 64.5% | 64.7% | Claude Opus 5 leads |
| HLE w/o toolsSource | 59% | 56.3% | Claude Mythos 5 leads |
| HealthBench (raw)Source | — | 67.1% | Not comparable |
| HealthBench (length-adjusted)Source | — | 57.8% | Not comparable |
| HealthBench ProfessionalSource | — | 59.8% | Not comparable |
| HealthBench Professional (raw)Source | — | 73.4% | Not comparable |
| BioMysteryBench (human-solvable)Source | — | 90.1% | Not comparable |
| BioMysteryBench (human-difficult)Source | — | 49.4% | Not comparable |
| SpatialBench VerifiedSource | — | 72.5% | Not comparable |
| SingleCellBenchSource | — | 60.6% | Not comparable |
| ProteinGym HardSource | — | 47.7% | Not comparable |
| Protein DesignSource | — | 42.5% | Not comparable |
| Organic chemistry V2Source | — | 61.6% | Not comparable |
| Protocols (troubleshooting)Source | — | 61.1% | Not comparable |
| Protocols (understanding)Source | — | 78.4% | Not comparable |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | — | 60.7% | Not comparable |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | — | 93.2% | Not comparable |
| AA-HLESource | — | 52.6% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | — | 31.3% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | — | 54.2% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | — | 50.1% | Not comparable |
Math6 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Mythos 5 | Claude Opus 5 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| USAMO 2026Source | 97.6% | — | Not comparable |
| IMO 2026Source | — | 42/42 | Not comparable |
| RiemannBench (no tools)Source | — | 60.0% | Not comparable |
| RiemannBench (tools)Source | — | 79.0% | Not comparable |
| ArXivMath Jun. 2026 (no tools)Source | — | 90.8% | Not comparable |
| ArXivMath Jun. 2026 (tools)Source | — | 91.3% | Not comparable |
Multilingual4 benchmarks
MultimodalClaude Mythos 5 wins12 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Mythos 5 | Claude Opus 5 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench MultimodalSource | 54.9% | — | Not comparable |
| CharXivSource | 93.5% | — | Not comparable |
| CharXiv w/o toolsSource | 88.9% | — | Not comparable |
| Chartography (no tools)Source | — | 29.6% | Not comparable |
| Chartography (tools)Source | — | 83.0% | Not comparable |
| BenchCAD Vision2Code (no tools)Source | — | 0.366 | Not comparable |
| BenchCAD Vision2Code (tools)Source | — | 0.821 | Not comparable |
| GDP.pdf (no tools)Source | — | 83.4% | Not comparable |
| GDP.pdf (tools)Source | — | 85.5% | Not comparable |
| OfficeQASource | — | 78.1% | Not comparable |
| OfficeQA ProSource | — | 66.9% | Not comparable |
| AA-MMMU-ProSource | — | 84.7% | Not comparable |
Frequently Asked Questions (5)
Which is better, Claude Mythos 5 or Claude Opus 5?
Claude Opus 5 is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 85.88 to 83.01. The biggest single separator in this matchup is BrowseComp, where the scores are 88% and 90.8%.
Which is better for knowledge tasks, Claude Mythos 5 or Claude Opus 5?
Claude Mythos 5 has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 68.5 versus 64.7. Inside this category, HLE w/o tools is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for coding, Claude Mythos 5 or Claude Opus 5?
Claude Mythos 5 has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 89.7 versus 89.5. Inside this category, SWE-bench Pro is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for agentic tasks, Claude Mythos 5 or Claude Opus 5?
Claude Opus 5 has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 90.8 versus 87. Inside this category, BrowseComp is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for multimodal and grounded tasks, Claude Mythos 5 or Claude Opus 5?
Claude Mythos 5 has the edge for multimodal and grounded tasks in this comparison, averaging 93.5 versus 66.9. Claude Opus 5 stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.