Claude Mythos 5vsGemini 3.0 Flash
Claude Mythos 5 | Gemini 3.0 Flash | |
|---|---|---|
| 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 | — |
| Benchmarks | ||
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% | 78% |
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% | 58% |
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% | 65.1% |
| BenchmarksPublished by one model only | ||
SWE-Bench ProAgentic coding — Can the AI fix real bugs in real software? It's handed actual problems from open-source projects and has to write code that genuinely solves them. Higher is better. | — | 49.6% |
MCP AtlasMulti-step tool use — Can the AI chain together many tools and steps to complete one bigger task, rather than doing just a single thing? Higher is better. | — | 62% |
ToolathlonGeneral tool use — Tests how well the AI uses everyday real-world tools and apps to get things done. Higher is better. | — | 49.4% |
BrowseCompWeb browsing — Can the AI browse the web and track down hard-to-find answers? Higher is better. | 88% | — |
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. | — | 33.7% |
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% | — |
ARC-AGI-2Abstract reasoning — Puzzle-style tests of abstract reasoning and pattern-finding — the kind of thing people find easy but AIs often struggle with. Higher is better. | — | 33.6% |
GPQA DiamondScience — Graduate-level science questions in biology, physics, and chemistry — hard enough that subject-matter PhDs score around 65%. Higher is better. | — | 90.4% |
Finance Agent v2Agentic financial analysis — Tests the AI on real financial-analysis work, like digging through reports and making sound decisions. Higher is better. | — | 42.6% |
GDPval-AAKnowledge work — Measures how well the AI does economically valuable knowledge work, judged against human experts. Shown as a rating (like a chess Elo) — higher is better. | — | 1204 |
CharXiv ReasoningChart reasoning — Can the AI read and reason about complex charts and figures, not just text? Higher is better. | — | 80.3% |
MMMU-ProMultimodal reasoning — A tougher version of MMMU — college-level questions that mix images, diagrams, and text together. Higher is better. | — | 81.2% |
Blueprint-Bench 2Spatial reasoning — Can the AI reason about space and layout — for example, understanding a floor plan or blueprint? Higher is better. | — | 0% |
MRCR v2 (8-needle) · 128k averageLong context — Tests whether the AI can find specific details buried inside a very long document (around 128k tokens — roughly a long book). Higher is better. | — | 67.2% |
MRCR v2 (8-needle) · 1M pointwiseLong context — Tests whether the AI can find specific details buried inside an enormous document (around 1 million tokens — many books). Higher is better. | — | 22.1% |
Arena Elo (Text)Community preference — Real people chat with two anonymous AIs side by side and vote for the answer they prefer. Votes become a chess-style Elo rating on arena.ai — it measures which AI people actually like, not test scores. Higher is better. | — | 1473 |
Arena Elo (Code)Community preference (code) — Like the text arena, but people vote on which AI writes better code. The votes become a chess-style Elo rating on arena.ai. Higher is better. | — | 1437 |
| Overview | ||
| Company | Anthropic | |
| Release date | Jun 9 2026 | Dec 17 2025 |
| Access | Proprietary | Proprietary |
Other comparisons
Claude Mythos 5vsGPT-5.6 SolGemini 3.0 FlashvsGPT-5.6 SolClaude Mythos 5vsMuse GlimmerGemini 3.0 FlashvsMuse GlimmerClaude Mythos 5vsGrok 4.6Gemini 3.0 FlashvsGrok 4.6Claude Mythos 5vsDeepSeek-V4-Pro-0813Gemini 3.0 FlashvsDeepSeek-V4-Pro-0813Claude Mythos 5vsMistral Medium 3.5Gemini 3.0 FlashvsMistral Medium 3.5Claude Mythos 5vsKimi K3Gemini 3.0 FlashvsKimi K3
Frequently asked questions
Claude Mythos 5 leads Gemini 3.0 Flash on 3 of the 3 benchmarks they both report (SWE-Bench Verified, Terminal-Bench 2.1, OSWorld-Verified). Gemini 3.0 Flash shipped 174 days before Claude Mythos 5, so benchmark comparisons should account for the intervening progress.
Published specifications for these two models are limited — see each model page for the latest details.
On SWE-Bench Verified, Claude Mythos 5 leads at 95.5% vs Gemini 3.0 Flash at 78%. On Terminal-Bench 2.1, Claude Mythos 5 leads at 88% vs Gemini 3.0 Flash at 58%. On OSWorld-Verified, Claude Mythos 5 leads at 85% vs Gemini 3.0 Flash at 65.1%.
Claude Mythos 5 was released by Anthropic on Jun 9 2026.
Gemini 3.0 Flash was released by Google on Dec 17 2025.
Claude Mythos 5 leads on SWE-Bench Verified — Claude Mythos 5 95.5% vs Gemini 3.0 Flash 78%.