Skip to main content

Model comparison

Claude Mythos 5 vs Gemini 2.5 Pro

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 3 shared benchmark results across 2 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

83.93/100
Margin
26.7pts
← winning
57.25/100
3 category wins0 category wins

Public leaderboard positions: Claude Mythos 5 #1 (Supported); Gemini 2.5 Pro #70 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. Claude Mythos 5 and Gemini 2.5 Pro share 3 comparable benchmark results. 3 of 8 categories are comparable. 12 results are unique to Claude Mythos 5; 21 to Gemini 2.5 Pro.

Updated July 23, 2026
Shared results
3
Claude Mythos 5 only
12
Gemini 2.5 Pro only
21
Comparable categories
3 / 8

Pick Claude Mythos 5 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Gemini 2.5 Pro only becomes the better choice if you want the cheaper token bill or you would rather avoid the extra latency and token burn of a reasoning model.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 3 shared benchmark results across 2 evidence categories; 3 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 57.25. 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 mathematics, where it averages 97.6 against 11.6. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is HLE, 64.5% to 18.8%.

Claude Mythos 5 is also the more expensive model on tokens at $10.00 input / $50.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $1.25 input / $10.00 output per 1M tokens for Gemini 2.5 Pro. That is roughly 5.0x on output cost alone. Claude Mythos 5 is the reasoning model in the pair, while Gemini 2.5 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. Claude Mythos 5 gives you the larger context window at 1M+, compared with 1M for Gemini 2.5 Pro.

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 Gemini 2.5 Pro
CategoryClaude Mythos 5ΔGemini 2.5 Pro
MathClaude Mythos 597.6Margin 86.0Gemini 2.5 Pro11.6
KnowledgeClaude Mythos 568.5Margin 41.1Gemini 2.5 Pro27.4
CodingClaude Mythos 589.7Margin 25.9Gemini 2.5 Pro63.8
AgenticClaude Mythos 587.0MarginNo overlapGemini 2.5 ProNot measured
MultimodalClaude Mythos 593.5MarginNo overlapGemini 2.5 ProNot measured

Decisive benchmark drivers

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

More
A · Claude Mythos 5B · Gemini 2.5 Pro
  1. HLE

    Knowledge
    Source ↗
    A 64.5%B 18.8%
    Winner: Claude Mythos 5Δ 45.7
    HLE: Claude Mythos 5 scored 64.5%; Gemini 2.5 Pro scored 18.8%. Claude Mythos 5 wins this benchmark.
  2. SWE-bench Verified

    Coding
    Source ↗
    A 95.5%B 63.8%
    Winner: Claude Mythos 5Δ 31.7
    SWE-bench Verified: Claude Mythos 5 scored 95.5%; Gemini 2.5 Pro scored 63.8%. Claude Mythos 5 wins this benchmark.
  3. GPQA

    Knowledge
    Source ↗
    A 94.1%B 83%
    Winner: Claude Mythos 5Δ 11.1
    GPQA: Claude Mythos 5 scored 94.1%; Gemini 2.5 Pro scored 83%. 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 5Gemini 2.5 ProComparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensClaude Mythos 5$10 input / $50 outputGemini 2.5 Pro$1.25 input / $10 outputGemini 2.5 Pro has the lower combined listed price.
Generation speedtokens per secondClaude Mythos 5Not availableGemini 2.5 Pro117 tok/sA complete speed comparison is not available.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenClaude Mythos 5Not availableGemini 2.5 Pro21.19 sA complete latency comparison is not available.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensClaude Mythos 51M+Gemini 2.5 Pro1MClaude Mythos 5 lists the larger context window.

Benchmark Deep Dive

Agentic
BenchmarkClaude Mythos 5Gemini 2.5 ProResult
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 88%Not comparable
OSWorld-VerifiedSource 85%Not comparable
BrowseCompSource 88%Not comparable
ExploitGymSource 17.5%Not comparable
AA Agentic IndexSource 7.1%Not comparable
τ²-bench resultsSource 54.1%Not comparable
Gert LabsSource 42.01%Not comparable
GDPval-AASource 8.3%Not comparable
GDPval-AASource 665Not comparable
CodingClaude Mythos 5 wins
BenchmarkClaude Mythos 5Gemini 2.5 ProResult
SWE-bench VerifiedSource 95.5%63.8%Claude Mythos 5 leads
SWE-bench ProSource 80.3%Not comparable
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 88.0%Not comparable
Vibe Code BenchSource 0.40%Not comparable
AA Coding IndexSource 33.3%Not comparable
AA-SciCodeSource 42.8%Not comparable
Reasoning
BenchmarkClaude Mythos 5Gemini 2.5 ProResult
AA-LCRSource 66.0%Not comparable
CritPtSource 2.6%Not comparable
KnowledgeClaude Mythos 5 wins
BenchmarkClaude Mythos 5Gemini 2.5 ProResult
GPQASource 94.1%83%Claude Mythos 5 leads
HLESource 64.5%18.8%Claude Mythos 5 leads
HLE w/o toolsSource 59%Not comparable
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource 25.8%Not comparable
AA-GPQA DiamondSource 84.4%Not comparable
AA-HLESource 21.1%Not comparable
AA-Omniscience IndexSource -14.3%Not comparable
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource 39.0%Not comparable
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource 87.4%Not comparable
MathClaude Mythos 5 wins
BenchmarkClaude Mythos 5Gemini 2.5 ProResult
USAMO 2026Source 97.6%Not comparable
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)Source 14.138%Not comparable
FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)Source 4.167%Not comparable
Multilingual
BenchmarkClaude Mythos 5Gemini 2.5 ProResult
SWE MultilingualSource 92.2%Not comparable
Multimodal
BenchmarkClaude Mythos 5Gemini 2.5 ProResult
SWE-bench MultimodalSource 54.9%Not comparable
CharXivSource 93.5%Not comparable
CharXiv w/o toolsSource 88.9%Not comparable
AA-MMMU-ProSource 74.9%Not comparable
Design Arena WebsiteSource 1197Not comparable
Inst. Following
BenchmarkClaude Mythos 5Gemini 2.5 ProResult
AA-IFBenchSource 48.7%Not comparable
Frequently Asked Questions (4)

Which is better, Claude Mythos 5 or Gemini 2.5 Pro?

Claude Mythos 5 is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 83.93 to 57.25. The biggest single separator in this matchup is HLE, where the scores are 64.5% and 18.8%.

Which is better for knowledge tasks, Claude Mythos 5 or Gemini 2.5 Pro?

Claude Mythos 5 has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 68.5 versus 27.4. Inside this category, HLE is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for coding, Claude Mythos 5 or Gemini 2.5 Pro?

Claude Mythos 5 has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 89.7 versus 63.8. Inside this category, SWE-bench Verified is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for math, Claude Mythos 5 or Gemini 2.5 Pro?

Claude Mythos 5 has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 97.6 versus 11.6. Gemini 2.5 Pro stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.

Related Comparisons

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.