Claude Mythos 5 vs Holo3-122B-A10B

Pick Claude Mythos 5 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Holo3-122B-A10B only becomes the better choice if you want the cheaper token bill or you would rather avoid the extra latency and token burn of a reasoning model.

Claude Mythos 5 is clearly ahead on the provisional aggregate, 99 to 94. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.

Claude Mythos 5's sharpest advantage is in agentic, where it averages 87 against 78.9. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is OSWorld-Verified, 85% to 78.8%.

Claude Mythos 5 is also the more expensive model on tokens at $10.00 input / $50.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.40 input / $3.00 output per 1M tokens for Holo3-122B-A10B. That is roughly 16.7x on output cost alone. Claude Mythos 5 is the reasoning model in the pair, while Holo3-122B-A10B is not. That usually helps on harder chain-of-thought-heavy tests, but it can also mean more latency and more token spend in real use. Claude Mythos 5 gives you the larger context window at 1M+, compared with 64K for Holo3-122B-A10B.