Compare AI models
| Specifications | ||
ParametersA rough measure of how big the model is. More parameters usually means more capable and more expensive to run, though it is a poor guide on its own — a smaller, newer model often beats a larger, older one. | — | 550B |
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. | — | $0.50DeepInfra |
Cheapest outputLowest output rate across every provider on OpenRouter, the lab included. May come from a different provider than the cheapest input. | — | $2.20DeepInfra |
| — | $210DeepInfra · fp4 | |
| 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% | 71.9% |
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% | 56.4% |
BrowseCompWeb browsing — Can the AI browse the web and track down hard-to-find answers? Higher is better. | 88% | 44.4% |
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% | 26.7% |
BullshitBench v2Nonsense detection — Given a confidently-worded but nonsensical prompt, does the AI spot that it makes no sense and push back — instead of playing along and inventing an answer? The score is how often it clearly called out the nonsense. Higher is better. | — | 49% |
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% | — |
GPQA DiamondScience — Graduate-level science questions in biology, physics, and chemistry — hard enough that subject-matter PhDs score around 65%. Higher is better. | — | 86.7% |
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% | — |
AA Intelligence IndexOverall intelligence — Artificial Analysis composite intelligence index across evals | — | 48 |
| Overview | ||
| Company | Anthropic | NVIDIA |
| Release date | Jun 9 2026 | Jun 4 2026 |
| Access | Closed | Open Source |
| Model details | View model | View model |
Other comparisons
Claude Mythos 5vsGPT-6.1 SolNemotron 3 UltravsGPT-6.1 SolClaude Mythos 5vsGemini 4 ArgonNemotron 3 UltravsGemini 4 ArgonClaude Mythos 5vsMuse Spark OpenNemotron 3 UltravsMuse Spark OpenClaude Mythos 5vsGrok 4.7Nemotron 3 UltravsGrok 4.7Claude Mythos 5vsDeepSeek-V4.1-FlashNemotron 3 UltravsDeepSeek-V4.1-FlashClaude Mythos 5vsMistral Large 4Nemotron 3 UltravsMistral Large 4Frequently asked questions
Claude Mythos 5 leads Nemotron 3 Ultra on 4 of the 4 benchmarks they both report (SWE-Bench Verified, Terminal-Bench 2.1, BrowseComp, Humanity's Last Exam). Nemotron 3 Ultra shipped 5 days before Claude Mythos 5, so benchmark comparisons should account for the intervening progress.
Claude Mythos 5 is closed, while Nemotron 3 Ultra is open source.
On SWE-Bench Verified, Claude Mythos 5 leads at 95.5% vs Nemotron 3 Ultra at 71.9%. On Terminal-Bench 2.1, Claude Mythos 5 leads at 88% vs Nemotron 3 Ultra at 56.4%. On BrowseComp, Claude Mythos 5 leads at 88% vs Nemotron 3 Ultra at 44.4%. On Humanity's Last Exam · with tools, Claude Mythos 5 leads at 64.5% vs Nemotron 3 Ultra at 26.7%.