Model comparison
Claude Mythos 5 vs Holo3-35B-A3B
Head-to-head evidence from 1 shared benchmark result across 1 category. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: Claude Mythos 5 #2 (Supported); Holo3-35B-A3B unranked (Not scored). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. Claude Mythos 5 and Holo3-35B-A3B share 1 comparable benchmark result. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 14 results are unique to Claude Mythos 5; 0 to Holo3-35B-A3B.
Updated July 24, 2026- Shared results
- 1
- Claude Mythos 5 only
- 14
- Holo3-35B-A3B only
- 0
- Comparable categories
- 1 / 8
Treat this as a split decision. Claude Mythos 5 makes more sense if agentic is the priority or you need the larger 1M+ context window; Holo3-35B-A3B is the better fit if you would rather avoid the extra latency and token burn of a reasoning model.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 1 shared benchmark result across 1 evidence category; 1 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 and Holo3-35B-A3B finish on the same BenchAlign overall score, so this is less about a single winner and more about where the edge shows up. The BenchAlign headline says tie; the benchmark table is where the real choice happens.
Claude Mythos 5 is the reasoning model in the pair, while Holo3-35B-A3B 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 Holo3-35B-A3B.
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 | Holo3-35B-A3B |
|---|---|---|---|
| Agentic | Claude Mythos 587.0 | Margin← 4.4 | Holo3-35B-A3B82.6 |
| Coding | Claude Mythos 589.7 | MarginNo overlap | Holo3-35B-A3BNot measured |
| Knowledge | Claude Mythos 568.5 | MarginNo overlap | Holo3-35B-A3BNot measured |
| Math | Claude Mythos 597.6 | MarginNo overlap | Holo3-35B-A3BNot measured |
| Multimodal | Claude Mythos 593.5 | MarginNo overlap | Holo3-35B-A3BNot measured |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
OSWorld-Verified
AgenticA 85%B 82.6%Winner: Claude Mythos 5Δ 2.4OSWorld-Verified: Claude Mythos 5 scored 85%; Holo3-35B-A3B scored 82.6%. 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 Mythos 5 | Holo3-35B-A3B | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Claude Mythos 5$10 input / $50 output | Holo3-35B-A3BNot available | A complete price comparison is not available. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | Claude Mythos 5Not available | Holo3-35B-A3BNot available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Claude Mythos 5Not available | Holo3-35B-A3BNot available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Claude Mythos 51M+ | Holo3-35B-A3B64K | Claude Mythos 5 lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Frequently Asked Questions (2)
Which is better, Claude Mythos 5 or Holo3-35B-A3B?
Claude Mythos 5 and Holo3-35B-A3B are tied on the BenchAlign overall score, so the right pick depends on which category matters most for your use case.
Which is better for agentic tasks, Claude Mythos 5 or Holo3-35B-A3B?
Claude Mythos 5 has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 87 versus 82.6. Inside this category, OSWorld-Verified is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.