Skip to main content
BenchLM
Advertise

Model comparison

Claude Mythos 5 vs Composer 2.5

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 2 shared benchmark results across 2 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

83.93/100
No comparison
N/A
1 category wins0 category wins

Public leaderboard positions: Claude Mythos 5 #1 (Supported); Composer 2.5 unranked (Not scored). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. Claude Mythos 5 and Composer 2.5 share 2 comparable benchmark results. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 13 results are unique to Claude Mythos 5; 3 to Composer 2.5.

Updated July 23, 2026
Shared results
2
Claude Mythos 5 only
13
Composer 2.5 only
3
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; Composer 2.5 is the better fit if you want the cheaper token bill.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 2 shared benchmark results across 2 evidence categories; 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 Composer 2.5 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 also the more expensive model on tokens at $10.00 input / $50.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.50 input / $2.50 output per 1M tokens for Composer 2.5. That is roughly 20.0x on output cost alone. Claude Mythos 5 gives you the larger context window at 1M+, compared with 200K for Composer 2.5.

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 scores and score margins for Claude Mythos 5 and Composer 2.5
CategoryClaude Mythos 5ΔComposer 2.5
AgenticClaude Mythos 587.0Margin← 17.7Composer 2.569.3
CodingClaude Mythos 589.7MarginNo overlapComposer 2.5Not measured
KnowledgeClaude Mythos 568.5MarginNo overlapComposer 2.5Not measured
MathClaude Mythos 597.6MarginNo overlapComposer 2.5Not measured
MultimodalClaude Mythos 593.5MarginNo overlapComposer 2.5Not measured

Decisive benchmark drivers

The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.

More
A · Claude Mythos 5B · Composer 2.5

  1. Terminal-Bench 2.0

    Agentic
    Source ↗
    A 88%B 69.3%
    Winner: Claude Mythos 5Δ 18.7
    Terminal-Bench 2.0: Claude Mythos 5 scored 88%; Composer 2.5 scored 69.3%. Claude Mythos 5 wins this benchmark.

Operational comparison

Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.

MetricClaude Mythos 5Composer 2.5Comparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensClaude Mythos 5$10 input / $50 outputComposer 2.5$0.5 input / $2.5 outputComposer 2.5 has the lower combined listed price.
Generation speedtokens per secondClaude Mythos 5Not availableComposer 2.5Not availableA complete speed comparison is not available.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenClaude Mythos 5Not availableComposer 2.5Not availableA complete latency comparison is not available.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensClaude Mythos 51M+Composer 2.5200KClaude Mythos 5 lists the larger context window.

Benchmark Deep Dive

AgenticClaude Mythos 5 wins
BenchmarkClaude Mythos 5Composer 2.5Result
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 88%69.3%Claude Mythos 5 leads
OSWorld-VerifiedSource 85%—Not comparable
BrowseCompSource 88%—Not comparable
ExploitGymSource 17.5%—Not comparable
Coding
BenchmarkClaude Mythos 5Composer 2.5Result
SWE-bench VerifiedSource 95.5%—Not comparable
SWE-bench ProSource 80.3%—Not comparable
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 88.0%69.3%Claude Mythos 5 leads
SWE MultilingualSource —79.8%Not comparable
cursorBench31Source —63.2%Not comparable
cursorBench32Source —56.1%Not comparable
Knowledge
BenchmarkClaude Mythos 5Composer 2.5Result
GPQASource 94.1%—Not comparable
HLESource 64.5%—Not comparable
HLE w/o toolsSource 59%—Not comparable
Math
BenchmarkClaude Mythos 5Composer 2.5Result
USAMO 2026Source 97.6%—Not comparable
Multilingual
BenchmarkClaude Mythos 5Composer 2.5Result
SWE MultilingualSource 92.2%—Not comparable
Multimodal
BenchmarkClaude Mythos 5Composer 2.5Result
SWE-bench MultimodalSource 54.9%—Not comparable
CharXivSource 93.5%—Not comparable
CharXiv w/o toolsSource 88.9%—Not comparable
Frequently Asked Questions (2)

Which is better, Claude Mythos 5 or Composer 2.5?

Claude Mythos 5 and Composer 2.5 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 Composer 2.5?

Claude Mythos 5 has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 87 versus 69.3. Inside this category, Terminal-Bench 2.0 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Related Comparisons

Explore More

Anthropic Compare Pricing Methodology Find Your Best LLM Overall Rankings
Last updated: July 23, 2026

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.