Skip to main content
BenchLM
Advertise

Model comparison

Claude Mythos 5 vs Gemma 4 26B A4B

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 2 shared benchmark results across 1 category. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

83.93/100
Margin
26.0pts
← winning
57.96/100
2 category wins0 category wins

Public leaderboard positions: Claude Mythos 5 #1 (Supported); Gemma 4 26B A4B #67 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. Claude Mythos 5 and Gemma 4 26B A4B share 2 comparable benchmark results. 2 of 8 categories are comparable. 13 results are unique to Claude Mythos 5; 18 to Gemma 4 26B A4B.

Updated July 23, 2026
Shared results
2
Claude Mythos 5 only
13
Gemma 4 26B A4B only
18
Comparable categories
2 / 8

Pick Claude Mythos 5 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Gemma 4 26B A4B only becomes the better choice if you want the cheaper token bill.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 2 shared benchmark results across 1 evidence category; 2 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 57.96. 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 knowledge, where it averages 68.5 against 43.4. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is HLE, 64.5% to 17.2%.

Claude Mythos 5 is also the more expensive model on tokens at $10.00 input / $50.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.00 input / $0.00 output per 1M tokens for Gemma 4 26B A4B. That is roughly Infinityx on output cost alone. Claude Mythos 5 gives you the larger context window at 1M+, compared with 256K for Gemma 4 26B A4B.

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 Gemma 4 26B A4B
CategoryClaude Mythos 5ΔGemma 4 26B A4B
KnowledgeClaude Mythos 568.5Margin← 25.1Gemma 4 26B A4B43.4
MultimodalClaude Mythos 593.5Margin← 19.7Gemma 4 26B A4B73.8
AgenticClaude Mythos 587.0MarginNo overlapGemma 4 26B A4BNot measured
CodingClaude Mythos 589.7MarginNo overlapGemma 4 26B A4BNot measured
MathClaude Mythos 597.6MarginNo overlapGemma 4 26B A4BNot measured

Decisive benchmark drivers

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

More
A · Claude Mythos 5B · Gemma 4 26B A4B

  1. HLE

    Knowledge
    Source ↗
    A 64.5%B 17.2%
    Winner: Claude Mythos 5Δ 47.3
    HLE: Claude Mythos 5 scored 64.5%; Gemma 4 26B A4B scored 17.2%. 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 5Gemma 4 26B A4BComparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensClaude Mythos 5$10 input / $50 outputGemma 4 26B A4B$0 input / $0 outputGemma 4 26B A4B has the lower combined listed price.
Generation speedtokens per secondClaude Mythos 5Not availableGemma 4 26B A4BNot availableA complete speed comparison is not available.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenClaude Mythos 5Not availableGemma 4 26B A4BNot availableA complete latency comparison is not available.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensClaude Mythos 51M+Gemma 4 26B A4B256KClaude Mythos 5 lists the larger context window.

Benchmark Deep Dive

Agentic
BenchmarkClaude Mythos 5Gemma 4 26B A4BResult
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 88%—Not comparable
OSWorld-VerifiedSource 85%—Not comparable
BrowseCompSource 88%—Not comparable
ExploitGymSource 17.5%—Not comparable
AA Agentic IndexSource —11.0%Not comparable
τ²-bench resultsSource —43.6%Not comparable
GDPval-AASource —13.1%Not comparable
GDPval-AASource —761Not comparable
Coding
BenchmarkClaude Mythos 5Gemma 4 26B A4BResult
SWE-bench VerifiedSource 95.5%—Not comparable
SWE-bench ProSource 80.3%—Not comparable
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 88.0%—Not comparable
AA Coding IndexSource —39.3%Not comparable
AA-SciCodeSource —40.0%Not comparable
Reasoning
BenchmarkClaude Mythos 5Gemma 4 26B A4BResult
AA-LCRSource —55.7%Not comparable
CritPtSource —0.0%Not comparable
KnowledgeClaude Mythos 5 wins
BenchmarkClaude Mythos 5Gemma 4 26B A4BResult
GPQASource 94.1%—Not comparable
HLESource 64.5%17.2%Claude Mythos 5 leads
HLE w/o toolsSource 59%8.7%Claude Mythos 5 leads
MMLU-ProSource —82.6%Not comparable
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource —25.7%Not comparable
AA-GPQA DiamondSource —79.2%Not comparable
AA-HLESource —18.3%Not comparable
AA-Omniscience IndexSource —-48.1%Not comparable
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource —18.2%Not comparable
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource —80.9%Not comparable
Math
BenchmarkClaude Mythos 5Gemma 4 26B A4BResult
USAMO 2026Source 97.6%—Not comparable
Multilingual
BenchmarkClaude Mythos 5Gemma 4 26B A4BResult
SWE MultilingualSource 92.2%—Not comparable
MultimodalClaude Mythos 5 wins
BenchmarkClaude Mythos 5Gemma 4 26B A4BResult
SWE-bench MultimodalSource 54.9%—Not comparable
CharXivSource 93.5%—Not comparable
CharXiv w/o toolsSource 88.9%—Not comparable
MMMU-ProSource —73.8%Not comparable
AA-MMMU-ProSource —69.2%Not comparable
Inst. Following
BenchmarkClaude Mythos 5Gemma 4 26B A4BResult
AA-IFBenchSource —72.4%Not comparable
Frequently Asked Questions (3)

Which is better, Claude Mythos 5 or Gemma 4 26B A4B?

Claude Mythos 5 is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 83.93 to 57.96. The biggest single separator in this matchup is HLE, where the scores are 64.5% and 17.2%.

Which is better for knowledge tasks, Claude Mythos 5 or Gemma 4 26B A4B?

Claude Mythos 5 has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 68.5 versus 43.4. Inside this category, HLE w/o tools is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for multimodal and grounded tasks, Claude Mythos 5 or Gemma 4 26B A4B?

Claude Mythos 5 has the edge for multimodal and grounded tasks in this comparison, averaging 93.5 versus 73.8. Gemma 4 26B A4B 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.