Model comparison
Claude Mythos 5 vs Llama 4 Maverick
Head-to-head evidence from 0 shared benchmark results across 0 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: Claude Mythos 5 #1 (Supported); Llama 4 Maverick #191 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. Claude Mythos 5 and Llama 4 Maverick share 0 comparable benchmark results. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 15 results are unique to Claude Mythos 5; 18 to Llama 4 Maverick.
Updated July 23, 2026- Shared results
- 0
- Claude Mythos 5 only
- 15
- Llama 4 Maverick only
- 18
- Comparable categories
- 1 / 8
Pick Claude Mythos 5 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Llama 4 Maverick 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 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 is clearly ahead on the BenchAlign aggregate, 83.93 to 23.49. 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 0.7.
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 Llama 4 Maverick. That is roughly Infinityx on output cost alone. Claude Mythos 5 is the reasoning model in the pair, while Llama 4 Maverick 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 Llama 4 Maverick.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | Claude Mythos 5 | Llama 4 Maverick | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Claude Mythos 5$10 input / $50 output | Llama 4 Maverick$0 input / $0 output | Llama 4 Maverick has the lower combined listed price. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | Claude Mythos 5Not available | Llama 4 Maverick121 tok/s | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Claude Mythos 5Not available | Llama 4 Maverick0.95 s | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Claude Mythos 51M+ | Llama 4 Maverick1M | Claude Mythos 5 lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic8 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Mythos 5 | Llama 4 Maverick | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 88% | — | Not comparable |
| OSWorld-VerifiedSource | 85% | — | Not comparable |
| BrowseCompSource | 88% | — | Not comparable |
| ExploitGymSource | 17.5% | — | Not comparable |
| AA Agentic IndexSource | — | 1.3% | Not comparable |
| τ²-bench resultsSource | — | 17.8% | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | — | 0.0% | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | — | -16 | Not comparable |
Coding5 benchmarks
Reasoning2 benchmarks
Knowledge9 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Mythos 5 | Llama 4 Maverick | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQASource | 94.1% | — | Not comparable |
| HLESource | 64.5% | — | Not comparable |
| HLE w/o toolsSource | 59% | — | Not comparable |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | — | 14.3% | Not comparable |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | — | 67.1% | Not comparable |
| AA-HLESource | — | 4.8% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | — | -41.8% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | — | 24.3% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | — | 87.3% | Not comparable |
MathClaude Mythos 5 wins2 benchmarks
Multilingual1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Mythos 5 | Llama 4 Maverick | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| SWE MultilingualSource | 92.2% | — | Not comparable |
Multimodal5 benchmarks
Inst. Following1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Mythos 5 | Llama 4 Maverick | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-IFBenchSource | — | 43.0% | Not comparable |
Frequently Asked Questions (2)
Which is better, Claude Mythos 5 or Llama 4 Maverick?
Claude Mythos 5 is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 83.93 to 23.49.
Which is better for math, Claude Mythos 5 or Llama 4 Maverick?
Claude Mythos 5 has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 97.6 versus 0.7. Llama 4 Maverick stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.
Self-host vs API cost
Estimates at 50,000 req/day · 1000 tokens/req average.
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.