Model comparison
Claude Mythos 5 vs SWE-1.7
Head-to-head evidence from 2 shared benchmark results across 2 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: Claude Mythos 5 #1 (Supported); SWE-1.7 unranked (Not scored). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. Claude Mythos 5 and SWE-1.7 share 2 comparable benchmark results. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 13 results are unique to Claude Mythos 5; 2 to SWE-1.7.
Updated July 23, 2026- Shared results
- 2
- Claude Mythos 5 only
- 13
- SWE-1.7 only
- 2
- Comparable categories
- 1 / 8
Treat this as a split decision. Claude Mythos 5 makes more sense if agentic is the priority or you need the larger 1M+ context window; SWE-1.7 is the better fit if its strengths line up with your actual workload.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 2 shared benchmark results across 2 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 and SWE-1.7 finish on the same BenchAlign overall score, so this is less about a single winner and more about where the edge shows up. The BenchAlign headline says tie; the benchmark table is where the real choice happens.
Claude Mythos 5 gives you the larger context window at 1M+, compared with 256K for SWE-1.7.
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 | SWE-1.7 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Agentic | Claude Mythos 587.0 | Margin← 5.5 | SWE-1.781.5 |
| Coding | Claude Mythos 589.7 | MarginNo overlap | SWE-1.7Not measured |
| Knowledge | Claude Mythos 568.5 | MarginNo overlap | SWE-1.7Not measured |
| Math | Claude Mythos 597.6 | MarginNo overlap | SWE-1.7Not measured |
| Multimodal | Claude Mythos 593.5 | MarginNo overlap | SWE-1.7Not 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 81.5%Winner: Claude Mythos 5Δ 6.5Terminal-Bench 2.0: Claude Mythos 5 scored 88%; SWE-1.7 scored 81.5%. 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 | SWE-1.7 | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Claude Mythos 5$10 input / $50 output | SWE-1.7Not available | A complete price comparison is not available. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | Claude Mythos 5Not available | SWE-1.7Not available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Claude Mythos 5Not available | SWE-1.7Not available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Claude Mythos 51M+ | SWE-1.7256K | Claude Mythos 5 lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Frequently Asked Questions (2)
Which is better, Claude Mythos 5 or SWE-1.7?
Claude Mythos 5 and SWE-1.7 are tied on the BenchAlign overall score, so the right pick depends on which category matters most for your use case.
Which is better for agentic tasks, Claude Mythos 5 or SWE-1.7?
Claude Mythos 5 has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 87 versus 81.5. Inside this category, Terminal-Bench 2.0 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
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.