Head-to-head comparison across 1 benchmark categories
Claude Mythos Preview
84
Gemini 3 Pro
78
Pick Claude Mythos Preview if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Gemini 3 Pro only becomes the better choice if you need the larger 2M context window or you would rather avoid the extra latency and token burn of a reasoning model.
Multimodal
+11.7 difference
Claude Mythos Preview
Gemini 3 Pro
$25 / $125
$null / $null
N/A
109 t/s
N/A
32.65s
1M
2M
Pick Claude Mythos Preview if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Gemini 3 Pro only becomes the better choice if you need the larger 2M context window or you would rather avoid the extra latency and token burn of a reasoning model.
Claude Mythos Preview is clearly ahead on the aggregate, 84 to 78. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
Claude Mythos Preview's sharpest advantage is in multimodal & grounded, where it averages 92.7 against 81. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is MMMU-Pro, 92.7% to 81%.
Claude Mythos Preview is the reasoning model in the pair, while Gemini 3 Pro 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. Gemini 3 Pro gives you the larger context window at 2M, compared with 1M for Claude Mythos Preview.
Claude Mythos Preview is ahead overall, 84 to 78. The biggest single separator in this matchup is MMMU-Pro, where the scores are 92.7% and 81%.
Claude Mythos Preview has the edge for multimodal and grounded tasks in this comparison, averaging 92.7 versus 81. Inside this category, MMMU-Pro is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Get notified when new models drop, benchmark scores change, or the leaderboard shifts. One email per week.
Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime. We only store derived location metadata for consent routing.