Model comparison
Claude Mythos 5 vs MiniMax M3
Head-to-head evidence from 7 shared benchmark results across 3 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: Claude Mythos 5 #1 (Supported); MiniMax M3 #15 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. Claude Mythos 5 and MiniMax M3 share 7 comparable benchmark results. 4 of 8 categories are comparable. 8 results are unique to Claude Mythos 5; 38 to MiniMax M3.
Updated July 23, 2026- Shared results
- 7
- Claude Mythos 5 only
- 8
- MiniMax M3 only
- 38
- Comparable categories
- 4 / 8
Pick Claude Mythos 5 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. MiniMax M3 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 7 shared benchmark results across 3 evidence categories; 4 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 69.75. 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 multimodal & grounded, where it averages 93.5 against 64.9. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is Terminal-Bench 2.0, 88% to 66%.
Claude Mythos 5 is also the more expensive model on tokens at $10.00 input / $50.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.30 input / $1.20 output per 1M tokens for MiniMax M3. That is roughly 41.7x on output cost alone. Claude Mythos 5 is the reasoning model in the pair, while MiniMax M3 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 MiniMax M3.
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 | Claude Mythos 5 | Δ | MiniMax M3 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Multimodal | Claude Mythos 593.5 | Margin← 28.6 | MiniMax M364.9 |
| Coding | Claude Mythos 589.7 | Margin← 17.5 | MiniMax M372.2 |
| Agentic | Claude Mythos 587.0 | Margin← 14.7 | MiniMax M372.3 |
| Math | Claude Mythos 597.6 | Margin← 11.9 | MiniMax M385.7 |
| Knowledge | Claude Mythos 568.5 | MarginNo overlap | MiniMax M3Not measured |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
Terminal-Bench 2.0
AgenticA 88%B 66%Winner: Claude Mythos 5Δ 22Terminal-Bench 2.0: Claude Mythos 5 scored 88%; MiniMax M3 scored 66%. Claude Mythos 5 wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
SWE-bench Pro
CodingA 80.3%B 59%Winner: Claude Mythos 5Δ 21.3SWE-bench Pro: Claude Mythos 5 scored 80.3%; MiniMax M3 scored 59%. Claude Mythos 5 wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
SWE-bench Verified
CodingA 95.5%B 80.5%Winner: Claude Mythos 5Δ 15SWE-bench Verified: Claude Mythos 5 scored 95.5%; MiniMax M3 scored 80.5%. Claude Mythos 5 wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
OSWorld-Verified
AgenticA 85%B 70.1%Winner: Claude Mythos 5Δ 14.9OSWorld-Verified: Claude Mythos 5 scored 85%; MiniMax M3 scored 70.1%. Claude Mythos 5 wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
USAMO 2026
MathA 97.6%B 85.7%Winner: Claude Mythos 5Δ 11.9USAMO 2026: Claude Mythos 5 scored 97.6%; MiniMax M3 scored 85.7%. Claude Mythos 5 wins this benchmark.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | Claude Mythos 5 | MiniMax M3 | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Claude Mythos 5$10 input / $50 output | MiniMax M3$0.3 input / $1.2 output | MiniMax M3 has the lower combined listed price. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | Claude Mythos 5Not available | MiniMax M3Not available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Claude Mythos 5Not available | MiniMax M3Not available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Claude Mythos 51M+ | MiniMax M31M | Claude Mythos 5 lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
AgenticClaude Mythos 5 wins19 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Mythos 5 | MiniMax M3 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 88% | 66% | Claude Mythos 5 leads |
| OSWorld-VerifiedSource | 85% | 70.1% | Claude Mythos 5 leads |
| BrowseCompSource | 88% | 83.5% | Claude Mythos 5 leads |
| ExploitGymSource | 17.5% | — | Not comparable |
| MCP AtlasSource | — | 74.2% | Not comparable |
| Claw-EvalSource | — | 74.5% | Not comparable |
| AA Agentic IndexSource | — | 35.4% | Not comparable |
| τ²-bench resultsSource | — | 88.9% | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | — | 44.7% | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | — | 1395 | Not comparable |
| GDPval rubricsSource | — | 74.7% | Not comparable |
| BankerToolBenchSource | — | 76.1% | Not comparable |
| ResearchClawBenchSource | — | 19.8% | Not comparable |
| OSWorld 2.0Source | — | 4.6% | Not comparable |
| AA BriefcaseSource | — | 1110 | Not comparable |
| AA EnterpriseOps-GymSource | — | 32.1% | Not comparable |
| AA Harvey LABSource | — | 88.4% | Not comparable |
| terminalBenchHardSource | — | 42.4% | Not comparable |
| aaTerminalBench21Source | — | 65.2% | Not comparable |
CodingClaude Mythos 5 wins9 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Mythos 5 | MiniMax M3 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench VerifiedSource | 95.5% | 80.5% | Claude Mythos 5 leads |
| SWE-bench ProSource | 80.3% | 59% | Claude Mythos 5 leads |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 88.0% | 66.0% | Claude Mythos 5 leads |
| NL2RepoSource | — | 42.1% | Not comparable |
| AA Coding IndexSource | — | 58.6% | Not comparable |
| AA-SciCodeSource | — | 45.4% | Not comparable |
| VIBE V2Source | — | 50.1% | Not comparable |
| SVG-BenchSource | — | 63.7% | Not comparable |
| KernelBench HardSource | — | 28.8% | Not comparable |
Reasoning2 benchmarks
Knowledge10 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Mythos 5 | MiniMax M3 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQASource | 94.1% | — | Not comparable |
| HLESource | 64.5% | — | Not comparable |
| HLE w/o toolsSource | 59% | — | Not comparable |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | — | 44.4% | Not comparable |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | — | 92.9% | Not comparable |
| AA-HLESource | — | 37.1% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | — | 1.4% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | — | 15.0% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | — | 16.1% | Not comparable |
| AA Openness IndexSource | — | 33.3% | Not comparable |
MathClaude Mythos 5 wins1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Mythos 5 | MiniMax M3 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| USAMO 2026Source | 97.6% | 85.7% | Claude Mythos 5 leads |
Multilingual1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Mythos 5 | MiniMax M3 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| SWE MultilingualSource | 92.2% | — | Not comparable |
MultimodalClaude Mythos 5 wins10 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Mythos 5 | MiniMax M3 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench MultimodalSource | 54.9% | — | Not comparable |
| CharXivSource | 93.5% | — | Not comparable |
| CharXiv w/o toolsSource | 88.9% | — | Not comparable |
| OfficeQA ProSource | — | 45.1% | Not comparable |
| OmniDocBench 1.5Source | — | 91.6% | Not comparable |
| MMMU-ProSource | — | 78.1% | Not comparable |
| VideoMMMUSource | — | 84.6% | Not comparable |
| Video-MME (with subtitle)Source | — | 85.4% | Not comparable |
| Design Arena WebsiteSource | — | 1289 | Not comparable |
| AA-MMMU-ProSource | — | 78.6% | Not comparable |
Inst. Following1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Mythos 5 | MiniMax M3 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-IFBenchSource | — | 82.9% | Not comparable |
Frequently Asked Questions (5)
Which is better, Claude Mythos 5 or MiniMax M3?
Claude Mythos 5 is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 83.93 to 69.75. The biggest single separator in this matchup is Terminal-Bench 2.0, where the scores are 88% and 66%.
Which is better for coding, Claude Mythos 5 or MiniMax M3?
Claude Mythos 5 has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 89.7 versus 72.2. Inside this category, Terminal-Bench 2.0 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for math, Claude Mythos 5 or MiniMax M3?
Claude Mythos 5 has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 97.6 versus 85.7. Inside this category, USAMO 2026 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for agentic tasks, Claude Mythos 5 or MiniMax M3?
Claude Mythos 5 has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 87 versus 72.3. Inside this category, Terminal-Bench 2.0 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for multimodal and grounded tasks, Claude Mythos 5 or MiniMax M3?
Claude Mythos 5 has the edge for multimodal and grounded tasks in this comparison, averaging 93.5 versus 64.9. MiniMax M3 stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.
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.