Model comparison
Claude Mythos 5 vs Command A+
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 #1 (Supported); Command A+ #135 (Estimated). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. Claude Mythos 5 and Command A+ share 1 comparable benchmark result. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 14 results are unique to Claude Mythos 5; 20 to Command A+.
Updated July 23, 2026- Shared results
- 1
- Claude Mythos 5 only
- 14
- Command A+ only
- 20
- Comparable categories
- 1 / 8
Pick Claude Mythos 5 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Command A+ only becomes the better choice if you want the cheaper token bill.
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 is clearly ahead on the BenchAlign aggregate, 83.93 to 47.51. 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 multimodal & grounded, where it averages 93.5 against 59.3. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is CharXiv, 93.5% to 52.7%.
Claude Mythos 5 is also the more expensive model on tokens at $10.00 input / $50.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $2.50 input / $10.00 output per 1M tokens for Command A+. That is roughly 5.0x on output cost alone. Claude Mythos 5 gives you the larger context window at 1M+, compared with 128K for Command A+.
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 | Command A+ |
|---|---|---|---|
| Multimodal | Claude Mythos 593.5 | Margin← 34.2 | Command A+59.3 |
| Agentic | Claude Mythos 587.0 | MarginNo overlap | Command A+Not measured |
| Coding | Claude Mythos 589.7 | MarginNo overlap | Command A+Not measured |
| Knowledge | Claude Mythos 568.5 | MarginNo overlap | Command A+Not measured |
| Math | Claude Mythos 597.6 | MarginNo overlap | Command A+Not measured |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
CharXiv
MultimodalA 93.5%B 52.7%Winner: Claude Mythos 5Δ 40.8CharXiv: Claude Mythos 5 scored 93.5%; Command A+ scored 52.7%. 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 | Command A+ | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Claude Mythos 5$10 input / $50 output | Command A+$2.5 input / $10 output | Command A+ has the lower combined listed price. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | Claude Mythos 5Not available | Command A+272 tok/s | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Claude Mythos 5Not available | Command A+0.25 s | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Claude Mythos 51M+ | Command A+128K | Claude Mythos 5 lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic9 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Mythos 5 | Command A+ | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 88% | — | Not comparable |
| OSWorld-VerifiedSource | 85% | — | Not comparable |
| BrowseCompSource | 88% | — | Not comparable |
| ExploitGymSource | 17.5% | — | Not comparable |
| τ²-bench resultsSource | — | 80.7% | Not comparable |
| AA Agentic IndexSource | — | 9.2% | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | — | 10.7% | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | — | 714 | Not comparable |
| terminalBenchHardSource | — | 25% | Not comparable |
Coding5 benchmarks
Reasoning2 benchmarks
Knowledge10 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Mythos 5 | Command A+ | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQASource | 94.1% | — | Not comparable |
| HLESource | 64.5% | — | Not comparable |
| HLE w/o toolsSource | 59% | — | Not comparable |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | — | 22.5% | Not comparable |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | — | 76.1% | Not comparable |
| AA-HLESource | — | 11.4% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | — | -4.0% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | — | 8.9% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | — | 14.1% | Not comparable |
| AA Openness IndexSource | — | 38.9% | Not comparable |
Math1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Mythos 5 | Command A+ | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| USAMO 2026Source | 97.6% | — | Not comparable |
Multilingual1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Mythos 5 | Command A+ | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| SWE MultilingualSource | 92.2% | — | Not comparable |
MultimodalClaude Mythos 5 wins6 benchmarks
Inst. Following1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Mythos 5 | Command A+ | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-IFBenchSource | — | 73.9% | Not comparable |
Frequently Asked Questions (2)
Which is better, Claude Mythos 5 or Command A+?
Claude Mythos 5 is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 83.93 to 47.51. The biggest single separator in this matchup is CharXiv, where the scores are 93.5% and 52.7%.
Which is better for multimodal and grounded tasks, Claude Mythos 5 or Command A+?
Claude Mythos 5 has the edge for multimodal and grounded tasks in this comparison, averaging 93.5 versus 59.3. Inside this category, CharXiv is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Related Comparisons
Choose a model with this week’s evidence
Join 2,000+ readers for ranking moves, pricing changes, and the claims that still need proof.
One email each week. Unsubscribe anytime.