Compare AI models
| Specifications | ||
Context windowHow much information the model can work with in one request, measured in tokens — pieces of words or other data. This includes your question, attachments, conversation and reply. Limits can vary by model variant and provider. | 1M | 1M |
| API pricingUSD per 1M tokens · lower wins | ||
Input priceWhat you pay for everything you send the model — your question, plus any documents or earlier conversation you include with it. | — | $0.10 |
Output priceWhat you pay for the text the model writes back. It is normally the dearer half: producing an answer costs more than reading one. | — | $0.40 |
Cached input priceA reduced rate for text you send over and over. If every request starts with the same instructions or the same document, the provider keeps a copy ready and charges less to read it again. | — | $0.01 |
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. | — | $0.05Google AI Studio |
Cheapest outputLowest output rate across every provider on OpenRouter, the lab included. May come from a different provider than the cheapest input. | — | $0.20Google AI Studio |
| — | $40.00Google list price | |
| These models have no shared benchmark scores. | ||
SWE-Bench VerifiedCoding — Real coding tasks pulled from open-source projects — the AI has to find and fix actual bugs. A human-checked version of the original SWE-Bench. Higher is better. | 95.5% | — |
Terminal-Bench 2.1Agentic terminal coding — Can the AI work in a command-line terminal — running commands and finishing technical setup tasks the way a developer would? Higher is better. | 88% | — |
Terminal-Bench 2.0Agentic terminal coding — Can the AI work in a command-line terminal — running commands and finishing technical setup tasks the way a developer would? (Version 2.0 of the test.) Higher is better. | 88% | — |
BrowseCompWeb browsing — Can the AI browse the web and track down hard-to-find answers? Higher is better. | 88% | — |
Humanity's Last Exam · with toolsMultidisciplinary reasoning — Humanity's Last Exam — extremely hard expert questions across many subjects. “With tools” means the AI is allowed to search the web or run code while answering. Higher is better. | 64.5% | — |
OSWorld-VerifiedAgentic computer use — Can the AI actually operate a computer — clicking, typing, and using real apps — to finish tasks on its own? Higher is better. | 85% | — |
| Overview | ||
| Company | Anthropic | |
| Release date | Jun 9 2026 | Jun 17 2025 |
| Access | Closed | Closed |
| Model details | View model | View model |
Other comparisons
Claude Mythos 5vsGPT-6.1 SolGemini 2.5 Flash-LitevsGPT-6.1 SolClaude Mythos 5vsMuse Spark OpenGemini 2.5 Flash-LitevsMuse Spark OpenClaude Mythos 5vsGrok 4.7Gemini 2.5 Flash-LitevsGrok 4.7Claude Mythos 5vsDeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017Gemini 2.5 Flash-LitevsDeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017Claude Mythos 5vsMistral Large 4Gemini 2.5 Flash-LitevsMistral Large 4Claude Mythos 5vsKimi K3Gemini 2.5 Flash-LitevsKimi K3Frequently asked questions
Claude Mythos 5 and Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite don't publish scores on any of the same benchmarks, so there's no direct head-to-head comparison. Only Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite has a verified first-party API price: $0.10 per million input tokens and $0.40 per million output tokens. No pay-as-you-go API rate is tracked for Claude Mythos 5. Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite shipped 357 days before Claude Mythos 5, so benchmark comparisons should account for the intervening progress.
Context windows are 1M (Claude Mythos 5) vs 1M (Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite).
Direct benchmark comparisons are unavailable — Claude Mythos 5 and Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite don't publish scores on any of the same benchmarks.