Compare AI models
| Specifications | ||
Context windowHow much text the model can hold in mind at once — your question, any documents you attach, the conversation so far, and its own reply. Go past it and the earliest part falls out of view. | 1M | — |
| API pricingUSD per 1M tokens · lower wins | ||
Cheapest inputLowest input rate across every provider on OpenRouter, the lab included. The cheapest endpoint may run a quantised build or a shorter context — see "Available from" on the model page. | — | $0.15DeepSeek |
Cheapest outputLowest output rate across every provider on OpenRouter, the lab included. May come from a different provider than the cheapest input. | — | $0.60DeepSeek |
| — | $60.00DeepSeek | |
| Benchmarks | ||
Terminal-Bench 4.0Agentic terminal coding — Can the AI work in a command-line terminal — running commands and finishing technical setup tasks the way a developer would? Version 4.0 recalibrated how much time, CPU and memory each task gets, removed eight tasks and fixed nineteen, so fewer runs fail for reasons that have nothing to do with the model. Scores are not comparable with earlier versions. Higher is better. | 60.9% | 42.3% |
DeepSWE 1.1Agentic coding — Artificial Analysis' independent test of deep, agentic software-engineering work — the AI has to plan and carry out substantial coding tasks end to end. (Version 1.1 of the test.) Higher is better. | — | 77% |
NL2Repo-BenchRepo-level code generation — Tests whether the AI can turn a natural-language requirement into working code across an entire repository, not just produce a single function or patch. Higher is better. | — | 68.2% |
Humanity's Last Exam · no toolsMultidisciplinary reasoning — Humanity's Last Exam — extremely hard expert questions across many subjects, written so you can't just look up the answer. “No tools” means the AI answers on its own. Higher is better. | — | 42.6% |
Agent's Last Exam · pass@1Agentic computer use — A hard set of desktop and operating-system tasks an AI agent has to finish by looking at the screen and working the machine itself. The score is the share it passes outright — partial credit does not count. Higher is better. | — | 35.4% |
AutomationBenchBusiness workflows — Tests whether the AI can run real multi-step business workflows — the kind of end-to-end office processes companies want to automate — from start to finish. Higher is better. | — | 60.5% |
Chartography · with toolsChart tasks — A chart-centred test run with tools available to the AI, reported separately from the chart-reading benchmarks above it. Higher is better. | — | 83% |
| Overview | ||
| Company | Anthropic | DeepSeek |
| Release date | Sep 1 2026 | Oct 17 2026 |
| Access | Closed | Open Weight |
| Model details | View model | View model |
Other comparisons
Claude Mythos 5.1vsGPT-6.1 SolDeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017vsGPT-6.1 SolClaude Mythos 5.1vsGemini 4 ArgonDeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017vsGemini 4 ArgonClaude Mythos 5.1vsMuse Spark OpenDeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017vsMuse Spark OpenClaude Mythos 5.1vsGrok 4.7DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017vsGrok 4.7Claude Mythos 5.1vsMistral Large 4DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017vsMistral Large 4Claude Mythos 5.1vsKimi K3DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017vsKimi K3Frequently asked questions
Claude Mythos 5.1 leads DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 on 1 of the 1 benchmark they both report (Terminal-Bench 4.0). Claude Mythos 5.1 shipped 46 days before DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017, so benchmark comparisons should account for the intervening progress.
Claude Mythos 5.1 is closed, while DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 is open weight.
On Terminal-Bench 4.0, Claude Mythos 5.1 leads at 60.9% vs DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 at 42.3%.