Claude Mythos Preview vs GPT-5 Chat vs Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview vs Qwen3.5 397B A17B

Artificial Analysis Agentic Index · a composite score measuring how well a model performs in agentic workflows · multi-step tool use, planning, error recovery, and autonomous task completion. Aggregates results from multiple agentic benchmarks including SWE-bench, tool-use tests, and planning evaluations. The canonical single-number metric for "how good is this model as an agent?"

Artificial Analysis Coding Index · a composite score that aggregates performance across multiple coding benchmarks into a single index. Tracks code generation quality, debugging ability, multi-language competence, and real-world software engineering tasks. Used by Artificial Analysis to rank model coding capability in a normalized, comparable format. Useful for developers choosing between models for coding-heavy workloads.

Graduate-Level Google-Proof QA (Diamond set) · expert-crafted questions in physics, biology, and chemistry that are difficult even for domain PhDs.

HLE (Humanity's Last Exam) · a reasoning benchmark designed to be the hardest public evaluation of AI. Questions span mathematics, physics, philosophy, and logic · curated to be at or beyond the frontier of human expert capability. Tested with and without tool augmentation. Claude Opus 4.7 scores 46.9% without tools and 54.7% with tools · making it one of the few benchmarks where the top score is below 60%.

SWE-bench Verified · 500 human-validated tasks from 12 real Python repositories (Django, Flask, scikit-learn, sympy, and others). Each task requires the model to produce a git patch that resolves a real GitHub issue and passes the test suite. The verified subset eliminates ambiguous tasks from the original SWE-bench. Claude Mythos Preview leads at 93.9%, crossing 90% for the first time in 2026. Opus 4.6 scores 80.8%. The benchmark remains the most-cited evaluation for code-generation capability.