ZMIME
Comparison · 2 models · Updated Nov 2, 2026

Claude Mythos 5.1 vs Ling 3.0 Flash Sante

Claude Mythos 5.1 comes out ahead, 66 to 36 on our weighted score.

  1. Our pick

    Anthropic

    Claude Mythos 5.1

    Released Sep 1, 2026

    66/100
    • ECI—
    • Price—
    • Context1M
    Full specs Remove Claude Mythos 5.1

  2. inclusionAI

    Ling 3.0 Flash Sante

    Released Sep 4, 2026New

    36/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.075 / $0.22
    • Context262K
    Full specs Remove Ling 3.0 Flash Sante

  3. Add a model

    Make it a three-way comparison.

01 — Verdict

Claude Mythos 5.1 is our pick

Claude Mythos 5.1 is the better all-round choice, scoring 66/100 against Ling 3.0 Flash Sante (36). It leads on inputs & features and context window. 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 priceLing 3.0 Flash SanteLing 3.0 Flash Sante $0.111 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend) · Claude Mythos 5.1 unpriced
  • Longest contextClaude Mythos 5.1Claude Mythos 5.1 1,000,000 · Ling 3.0 Flash Sante 262,144 tokens
  • Widest inputsClaude Mythos 5.1Claude Mythos 5.1: Text, Images, PDFs · Ling 3.0 Flash Sante: Text
  • Self-hostingNo open weightsBoth are available only through APIs
How the score is built
MeasureWeightClaude Mythos 5.1Ling 3.0 Flash Sante
Inputs & features60%7035
Context window40%6037
Overall100%66/10036/100

Left out because at least one model lacks the data: capability and price. The remaining weights were rescaled.

02 — Side by side

Every spec in one table

Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.

Claude Mythos 5.1 vs Ling 3.0 Flash Sante specifications side by side
SpecificationClaude Mythos 5.1AnthropicLing 3.0 Flash SanteinclusionAI
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)——
ECI rank——
Price per million tokens
Input—$0.075
Output—$0.22
Cached input——
Blended (3:1)—$0.111
Long-context rate—Same rate
Price source—Median of 2 providers
Limits
Context window1,000,000 tokens (best)262,144 tokens
Max output128,000 tokens (best)32,768 tokens
Inputs and features
TextYesYes
ImagesYesNo
PDFsYesNo
AudioNoNo
VideoNoNo
ReasoningYesYes
Tool callingYesYes
Structured outputNoNo
Availability
WeightsProprietaryProprietary
API model ID——
API providers—2
ReleasedSep 1, 2026Sep 4, 2026
Knowledge cutoffJun 2026—
03 — Cost

What would a month cost?

Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.

  • Claude Mythos 5.1—
  • Ling 3.0 Flash Sante$1.19
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: Claude Mythos 5.1 or Ling 3.0 Flash Sante?

Claude Mythos 5.1 is the better all-round choice, scoring 66/100 against Ling 3.0 Flash Sante (36). It leads on inputs & features and context window. 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, Claude Mythos 5.1 or Ling 3.0 Flash Sante?

Ling 3.0 Flash Sante is cheaper at $0.075 input / $0.22 output per million tokens (median across 2 API providers). . At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.111 per million tokens for Ling 3.0 Flash Sante versus . Claude Mythos 5.1 has no published per-token price.

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

There is no independent benchmark that covers both models yet. Claude Mythos 5.1 has not been scored yet and Ling 3.0 Flash Sante has not been scored yet.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Claude Mythos 5.1 and Ling 3.0 Flash Sante yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. Test both on a sample of your own tasks. Both support tool calling for agent workflows.

Which has the bigger context window?

Claude Mythos 5.1 has the largest context window at 1,000,000 tokens, against 262,144 for Ling 3.0 Flash Sante. Maximum output per response: Claude Mythos 5.1 up to 128,000, Ling 3.0 Flash Sante up to 32,768 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

Claude Mythos 5.1 accepts text, images and PDFs; Ling 3.0 Flash Sante accepts text. Claude Mythos 5.1 handles the widest range of inputs.

Are any of these open source?

No. Claude Mythos 5.1 and Ling 3.0 Flash Sante are proprietary and only available through APIs and apps.

Which is newer?

Ling 3.0 Flash Sante is the newest, released Sep 4, 2026. Claude Mythos 5.1 came out Sep 1, 2026. Knowledge cutoff: Claude Mythos 5.1 Jun 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 Nov 2, 2026.

05 — Keep comparing

Related comparisons