Skip to main content
BenchLM
Advertise

Model comparison

Claude Mythos 5 vs MiMo-V2-Omni

Data verified

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

83.93/100
Margin
20.8pts
← winning
63.15/100
1 category wins0 category wins

Public leaderboard positions: Claude Mythos 5 #1 (Supported); MiMo-V2-Omni #40 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. Claude Mythos 5 and MiMo-V2-Omni share 1 comparable benchmark result. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 14 results are unique to Claude Mythos 5; 13 to MiMo-V2-Omni.

Updated July 23, 2026
Shared results
1
Claude Mythos 5 only
14
MiMo-V2-Omni only
13
Comparable categories
1 / 8

Pick Claude Mythos 5 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. MiMo-V2-Omni only becomes the better choice if its workflow or ecosystem matters more than the raw scoreboard.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 1 shared benchmark result across 1 evidence category; 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 63.15. 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 coding, where it averages 89.7 against 74.8. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is SWE-bench Verified, 95.5% to 74.8%.

Claude Mythos 5 gives you the larger context window at 1M+, compared with 262K for MiMo-V2-Omni.

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 MiMo-V2-Omni
CategoryClaude Mythos 5ΔMiMo-V2-Omni
CodingClaude Mythos 589.7Margin← 14.9MiMo-V2-Omni74.8
AgenticClaude Mythos 587.0MarginNo overlapMiMo-V2-OmniNot measured
KnowledgeClaude Mythos 568.5MarginNo overlapMiMo-V2-OmniNot measured
MathClaude Mythos 597.6MarginNo overlapMiMo-V2-OmniNot measured
MultimodalClaude Mythos 593.5MarginNo overlapMiMo-V2-OmniNot measured

Decisive benchmark drivers

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

More
A · Claude Mythos 5B · MiMo-V2-Omni

  1. SWE-bench Verified

    Coding
    Source ↗
    A 95.5%B 74.8%
    Winner: Claude Mythos 5Δ 20.7
    SWE-bench Verified: Claude Mythos 5 scored 95.5%; MiMo-V2-Omni scored 74.8%. 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 5MiMo-V2-OmniComparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensClaude Mythos 5$10 input / $50 outputMiMo-V2-OmniNot availableA complete price comparison is not available.
Generation speedtokens per secondClaude Mythos 5Not availableMiMo-V2-OmniNot availableA complete speed comparison is not available.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenClaude Mythos 5Not availableMiMo-V2-OmniNot availableA complete latency comparison is not available.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensClaude Mythos 51M+MiMo-V2-Omni262KClaude Mythos 5 lists the larger context window.

Benchmark Deep Dive

Agentic
BenchmarkClaude Mythos 5MiMo-V2-OmniResult
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 88%—Not comparable
OSWorld-VerifiedSource 85%—Not comparable
BrowseCompSource 88%—Not comparable
ExploitGymSource 17.5%—Not comparable
Claw-EvalSource —45.2%Not comparable
τ²-bench resultsSource —91.2%Not comparable
CodingClaude Mythos 5 wins
BenchmarkClaude Mythos 5MiMo-V2-OmniResult
SWE-bench VerifiedSource 95.5%74.8%Claude Mythos 5 leads
SWE-bench ProSource 80.3%—Not comparable
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 88.0%—Not comparable
AA-SciCodeSource —36.7%Not comparable
Reasoning
BenchmarkClaude Mythos 5MiMo-V2-OmniResult
AA-LCRSource —66.7%Not comparable
CritPtSource —1.1%Not comparable
Knowledge
BenchmarkClaude Mythos 5MiMo-V2-OmniResult
GPQASource 94.1%—Not comparable
HLESource 64.5%—Not comparable
HLE w/o toolsSource 59%—Not comparable
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource —35.0%Not comparable
AA-GPQA DiamondSource —82.8%Not comparable
AA-HLESource —19.9%Not comparable
AA-Omniscience IndexSource —-17.4%Not comparable
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource —18.7%Not comparable
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource —44.4%Not comparable
Math
BenchmarkClaude Mythos 5MiMo-V2-OmniResult
USAMO 2026Source 97.6%—Not comparable
Multilingual
BenchmarkClaude Mythos 5MiMo-V2-OmniResult
SWE MultilingualSource 92.2%—Not comparable
Multimodal
BenchmarkClaude Mythos 5MiMo-V2-OmniResult
SWE-bench MultimodalSource 54.9%—Not comparable
CharXivSource 93.5%—Not comparable
CharXiv w/o toolsSource 88.9%—Not comparable
AA-MMMU-ProSource —69.9%Not comparable
Inst. Following
BenchmarkClaude Mythos 5MiMo-V2-OmniResult
AA-IFBenchSource —53.5%Not comparable
Frequently Asked Questions (2)

Which is better, Claude Mythos 5 or MiMo-V2-Omni?

Claude Mythos 5 is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 83.93 to 63.15. The biggest single separator in this matchup is SWE-bench Verified, where the scores are 95.5% and 74.8%.

Which is better for coding, Claude Mythos 5 or MiMo-V2-Omni?

Claude Mythos 5 has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 89.7 versus 74.8. Inside this category, SWE-bench Verified 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.