DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT vs Laguna S 2.1 vs Claude Mythos 5
Claude Mythos 5 comes out ahead, 72 to 51 and 45 on our weighted score, though Laguna S 2.1 is 160× cheaper per token.
GoogleDiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT
51/100- ECI—
- Price—
- Context262K
PoolsideLaguna S 2.1
45/100- ECI—
- Price$0.10 / $0.20
- Context1.05M
- Our pick
AnthropicClaude Mythos 5
72/100- ECI—
- Price$10.00 / $50.00
- Context1M
Claude Mythos 5 is our pick
Claude Mythos 5 is the better all-round choice, scoring 72/100 against DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT (51) and Laguna S 2.1 (45). It leads on inputs & features. The score weighs inputs & features 60%, context window 40%. None of the shared benchmarks cover every model here yet, so capability is left out of this verdict.
- CapabilityNot enough dataNo independent benchmark covers every model here yet
- Lowest priceLaguna S 2.1Laguna S 2.1 $0.125 · Claude Mythos 5 $20.00 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend) · DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT unpriced
- Longest contextLaguna S 2.1Laguna S 2.1 1,048,576 · Claude Mythos 5 1,000,000 · DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT 262,144 tokens
- Widest inputsClaude Mythos 5DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT: Text, Images · Laguna S 2.1: Text · Claude Mythos 5: Text, Images, PDFs
- Self-hostingDiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT and Laguna S 2.1Publishes downloadable weights (Apache 2.0)
| Measure | Weight | DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT | Laguna S 2.1 | Claude Mythos 5 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Inputs & features | 60% | 60 | 35 | 80 |
| Context window | 40% | 37 | 61 | 60 |
| Overall | 100% | 51/100 | 45/100 | 72/100 |
Left out because at least one model lacks the data: capability and price. The remaining weights were rescaled.
Every spec in one table
Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.
| Specification | DiffusionGemma 26B A4B ITGoogle | Laguna S 2.1Poolside | Claude Mythos 5Anthropic |
|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | |||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | — | — | — |
| ECI rank | — | — | — |
| Price per million tokens | |||
| Input | — | $0.10 (best) | $10.00 |
| Output | — | $0.20 (best) | $50.00 |
| Cached input | — | — | — |
| Blended (3:1) | — | $0.125 (best) | $20.00 |
| Long-context rate | — | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | — | Median of 4 providers | Median of 2 providers |
| Limits | |||
| Context window | 262,144 tokens | 1,048,576 tokens (best) | 1,000,000 tokens |
| Max output | 32,768 tokens | 32,768 tokens | 128,000 tokens (best) |
| Inputs and features | |||
| Text | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Images | Yes | No | Yes |
| PDFs | No | No | Yes |
| Audio | No | No | No |
| Video | No | No | No |
| Reasoning | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | No | No | Yes |
| Availability | |||
| Weights | OpenApache 2.0 | Open | Proprietary |
| API model ID | — | poolside/laguna-s-2.1 | — |
| API providers | 1 | 6 (best) | 2 |
| Released | Jun 9, 2026 | Jul 21, 2026 | Jun 9, 2026 |
| Knowledge cutoff | Jan 2025 | — | Jan 31, 2026 |
What would a month cost?
Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.
- DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT—
- Laguna S 2.1$1.40
- Claude Mythos 5$200.00
Which should you choose?
Which is better: DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT, Laguna S 2.1 or Claude Mythos 5?
Claude Mythos 5 is the better all-round choice, scoring 72/100 against DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT (51) and Laguna S 2.1 (45). It leads on inputs & features. The score weighs inputs & features 60%, context window 40%. None of the shared benchmarks cover every model here yet, so capability is left out of this verdict.
Which is cheaper, DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT, Laguna S 2.1 or Claude Mythos 5?
Laguna S 2.1 is cheaper at $0.10 input / $0.20 output per million tokens (median across 4 API providers; free on Poolside). Claude Mythos 5 costs $10.00 input / $50.00 output per million tokens (median across 2 API providers). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.125 per million tokens for Laguna S 2.1 versus $20.00 for Claude Mythos 5 (160× as much). DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT has no published per-token price.
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
There is no independent benchmark that covers all three models yet. DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT has not been scored yet, Laguna S 2.1 has not been scored yet and Claude Mythos 5 has not been scored yet.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT, Laguna S 2.1 and Claude Mythos 5 yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. Test both on a sample of your own tasks. All three support tool calling for agent workflows.
Which has the bigger context window?
Laguna S 2.1 has the largest context window at 1,048,576 tokens, against 1,000,000 for Claude Mythos 5 and 262,144 for DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT. Maximum output per response: DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT up to 32,768, Laguna S 2.1 up to 32,768, Claude Mythos 5 up to 128,000 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT accepts text and images; Laguna S 2.1 accepts text; Claude Mythos 5 accepts text, images and PDFs. Claude Mythos 5 handles the widest range of inputs.
Are any of these open source?
DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT and Laguna S 2.1 publishes its weights (Apache 2.0) and can be self-hosted; Claude Mythos 5 is proprietary.
Which is newer?
Laguna S 2.1 is the newest, released Jul 21, 2026. DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT came out Jun 9, 2026; Claude Mythos 5 came out Jun 9, 2026. Knowledge cutoff: DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT Jan 2025, Claude Mythos 5 Jan 31, 2026.
How do you decide the winner?
Each model gets a 0–100 score on capability (50%, independent benchmark results); price (25%, blended price per million tokens (3 input : 1 output), log scale); inputs & features (15%, image, PDF, audio and video input, tool calling, structured output and reasoning); context window (10%, maximum tokens per request, log scale). Dimensions missing for any model are dropped and the remaining weights rescaled, so every model is judged on the same evidence. Specs and prices come from public model listings and the labs’ own API pages; capability scores come from independent benchmark runs. Data updated Oct 4, 2026.
