Skip to main content
BenchLM
Advertise

Model comparison

Claude Mythos 5 vs DeepSeek V4 Pro Base

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 0 shared benchmark results across 0 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

No sourced benchmark result is currently shared by both models. This page therefore compares only the available metadata, pricing, and runtime rows; it does not name a quality winner.
83.93/100
No comparison
N/A
1 category wins0 category wins

Public leaderboard positions: Claude Mythos 5 #1 (Supported); DeepSeek V4 Pro Base unranked (Not scored). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. Claude Mythos 5 and DeepSeek V4 Pro Base share 0 comparable benchmark results. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 15 results are unique to Claude Mythos 5; 24 to DeepSeek V4 Pro Base.

Updated July 23, 2026
Shared results
0
Claude Mythos 5 only
15
DeepSeek V4 Pro Base only
24
Comparable categories
1 / 8

Treat this as a split decision. Claude Mythos 5 makes more sense if knowledge is the priority or you need the larger 1M+ context window; DeepSeek V4 Pro Base 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 0 shared benchmark results across 0 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 DeepSeek V4 Pro Base 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 DeepSeek V4 Pro Base 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 1M for DeepSeek V4 Pro Base.

Operational comparison

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

MetricClaude Mythos 5DeepSeek V4 Pro BaseComparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensClaude Mythos 5$10 input / $50 outputDeepSeek V4 Pro BaseNot availableA complete price comparison is not available.
Generation speedtokens per secondClaude Mythos 5Not availableDeepSeek V4 Pro BaseNot availableA complete speed comparison is not available.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenClaude Mythos 5Not availableDeepSeek V4 Pro BaseNot availableA complete latency comparison is not available.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensClaude Mythos 51M+DeepSeek V4 Pro Base1MClaude Mythos 5 lists the larger context window.

Benchmark Deep Dive

Agentic
BenchmarkClaude Mythos 5DeepSeek V4 Pro BaseResult
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 88%—Not comparable
OSWorld-VerifiedSource 85%—Not comparable
BrowseCompSource 88%—Not comparable
ExploitGymSource 17.5%—Not comparable
Coding
BenchmarkClaude Mythos 5DeepSeek V4 Pro BaseResult
SWE-bench VerifiedSource 95.5%—Not comparable
SWE-bench ProSource 80.3%—Not comparable
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 88.0%—Not comparable
BigCodeBenchSource —59.2%Not comparable
HumanEvalSource —76.8%Not comparable
Reasoning
BenchmarkClaude Mythos 5DeepSeek V4 Pro BaseResult
BBHSource —87.5%Not comparable
DROPSource —88.7%Not comparable
HellaSwagSource —88.0%Not comparable
WinoGrandeSource —81.5%Not comparable
CLUEWSCSource —85.2%Not comparable
LongBench v2Source —51.5%Not comparable
KnowledgeClaude Mythos 5 wins
BenchmarkClaude Mythos 5DeepSeek V4 Pro BaseResult
GPQASource 94.1%—Not comparable
HLESource 64.5%—Not comparable
HLE w/o toolsSource 59%—Not comparable
AGIEvalSource —83.1%Not comparable
MMLUSource —90.1%Not comparable
MMLU-ReduxSource —90.8%Not comparable
MMLU-ProSource —73.5%Not comparable
MMMLUSource —90.3%Not comparable
C-EvalSource —93.1%Not comparable
CMMLUSource —90.8%Not comparable
MultiLoKoSource —51.1%Not comparable
SimpleQASource —55.2%Not comparable
SuperGPQASource —53.9%Not comparable
FACTS ParametricSource —62.6%Not comparable
TriviaQASource —85.6%Not comparable
Math
BenchmarkClaude Mythos 5DeepSeek V4 Pro BaseResult
USAMO 2026Source 97.6%—Not comparable
GSM8KSource —92.6%Not comparable
MATHSource —64.5%Not comparable
CMathSource —90.9%Not comparable
Multilingual
BenchmarkClaude Mythos 5DeepSeek V4 Pro BaseResult
SWE MultilingualSource 92.2%—Not comparable
MGSMSource —84.4%Not comparable
Multimodal
BenchmarkClaude Mythos 5DeepSeek V4 Pro BaseResult
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 DeepSeek V4 Pro Base?

Claude Mythos 5 and DeepSeek V4 Pro Base 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 knowledge tasks, Claude Mythos 5 or DeepSeek V4 Pro Base?

Claude Mythos 5 has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 68.5 versus 66.4. DeepSeek V4 Pro Base stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.

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.