Claude Mythos 5.1 vs Kimi K2 Thinking
At a Glance
| Compare | Claude Mythos 5.1Anthropic |  Kimi K2 ThinkingMoonshot AI |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing and Limits | ||
| Input priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens | $10.00Anthropic ↗ · Sep 2, 2026 | $0.60Openrouter ↗ · Sep 23, 2026 |
| Output priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens | $50.00Anthropic ↗ · Sep 2, 2026 | $2.50Openrouter ↗ · Sep 23, 2026 |
| Context windowMaximum documented tokens | 1,000K | 262K |
| Model facts checked | Sep 2, 2026View model evidence → | Aug 28, 2026View model evidence → |
Token prices are the lowest available sourced USD rates; input and output may use different providers. Cost ranking estimates output spend on LiveBench, not a full request bill. Ranking methodology →
Available Benchmarks
Side-by-Side Facts
| Field | Claude Mythos 5.1 | Kimi-K2-Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| Developer | Anthropic | Moonshot AI |
| Family | Claude 5 1 | Kimi K2 Thinking |
| Model | Claude Mythos 5.1 | Kimi-K2-Thinking |
| Version | Claude Mythos 5.1 | Kimi-K2-Thinking |
| Lifecycle | active | active |
| Released | 2026-09-01 | 2025-11-06 |
| Knowledge cutoff | 2026-06-01 | Unknown |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text |
| Output modalities | Text | Text |
| Context window | 1,000K | 262K |
| Total parameters | Unknown | 1T |
| Active parameters | Unknown | 32B |
| License | Unknown | other |
| Open weights | No | Yes |
| API available | Yes | Yes |
| Self-hostable | No | Yes |
| Provider access | Anthropic (Project Glasswing) | Hugging Face (Standard), Openrouter (Standard) |
| Capabilities | chat, generation, reasoning, tools | chat, generation, reasoning, tools |
Claude Mythos 5.1 Capabilities
Kimi K2 Thinking Capabilities
Related Comparisons
All text comparisons →| A | Pair | B | Context |
|---|---|---|---|
Claude Mythos 5.1Anthropic | vs |  GPT-6 AstraOpenAI | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Claude Fable 5.1Anthropic | vs | Claude Mythos 5.1Anthropic | family variantsimage, text |
Claude Mythos 5.1Anthropic | vs |  Gemini 3.1 ProGoogle DeepMind | cross-developer peerstext |
Claude Mythos 5.1Anthropic | vs |  DeepSeek-V4.1-FlashDeepSeek | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Claude Mythos 5.1Anthropic | vs | Grok 4.6xAI | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Claude Mythos 5.1Anthropic | vs |  Qwen3.8-MaxQwen | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Claude Mythos 5.1Anthropic | vs | Kimi-K3Moonshot AI | cross-developer peersimage, text |
 MiniMax-M3MiniMax | vs | Claude Mythos 5.1Anthropic | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Claude Mythos 5.1Anthropic | vs |  GLM-5.3Z.ai | cross-developer peerstext |
Claude Mythos 5.1Anthropic | vs |  Hy4 previewTencent | cross-developer peerstext |
Claude Mythos 5.1Anthropic | vs | Seed 2.1 ProByteDance Seed | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Claude Mythos 5.1Anthropic | vs |  Mistral Large 3Mistral AI | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Primary Evidence
Sources and Freshness
Questions
Claude Mythos 5.1 vs Kimi K2 Thinking FAQs
Is Claude Mythos 5.1 or Kimi K2 Thinking better for coding?+
This comparison does not currently contain a protocol-matched coding benchmark for both Claude Mythos 5.1 and Kimi K2 Thinking, so Model Markets cannot name a coding leader from pricing, context size, or capability labels alone.
Which is cheaper, Claude Mythos 5.1 or Kimi K2 Thinking?+
Claude Mythos 5.1 is $10.00 and Kimi K2 Thinking is $0.60 per million tokens, so Kimi K2 Thinking is cheaper on this metric. Claude Mythos 5.1 is $50.00 and Kimi K2 Thinking is $2.50 per million tokens, so Kimi K2 Thinking is cheaper on this metric.
Which has a larger context window, Claude Mythos 5.1 or Kimi K2 Thinking?+
Claude Mythos 5.1 has the larger sourced context window. Claude Mythos 5.1 supports 1,000K and Kimi K2 Thinking supports 262K.
Which performs better in benchmarks, Claude Mythos 5.1 or Kimi K2 Thinking?+
There is no overall benchmark winner: At least two independently verified, protocol-matched benchmarks are required for an overall winner.
Can Claude Mythos 5.1 or Kimi K2 Thinking be self-hosted?+
Kimi K2 Thinking is the only model in this pair currently marked as self-hostable. Claude Mythos 5.1 is not marked open weight; Kimi K2 Thinking is open weight.
Can Claude Mythos 5.1 and Kimi K2 Thinking understand images?+
Claude Mythos 5.1 is documented with image input; Kimi K2 Thinking is not documented with image input. This reflects supported input modalities, not vision quality.
Which can generate longer answers, Claude Mythos 5.1 or Kimi K2 Thinking?+
Kimi K2 Thinking has the larger sourced maximum output: Claude Mythos 5.1 supports 128K and Kimi K2 Thinking supports 131K output tokens.
Do Claude Mythos 5.1 and Kimi K2 Thinking support reasoning and tool use?+
Claude Mythos 5.1: reasoning, tool calling, and image input. Kimi K2 Thinking: reasoning and tool calling. Feature support does not establish relative quality.
Which is available from more inference providers, Claude Mythos 5.1 or Kimi K2 Thinking?+
Claude Mythos 5.1 has 1 sourced provider route; Kimi K2 Thinking has 2, so Kimi K2 Thinking has broader tracked availability.
Which offers better value, Claude Mythos 5.1 or Kimi K2 Thinking?+
There is no universal value winner. Compare the input and output prices above with the matched benchmark result for your workload: cheaper tokens can be offset by different quality, token usage, latency, or provider availability.