Claude Code – Claude Opus 5.5 (high) vs. Codex – GPT-6.1 Sol (xhigh): geospatial agent comparison
Comparison between Claude Code – Claude Opus 5.5 (high) and Codex – GPT-6.1 Sol (xhigh) on the Geospatial Agent Index, each benchmark, cost, time and token use, from the same tasks, agent and limits. Methodology.
Side by side
| Metric | Claude Code – Claude Opus 5.5 (high) | Codex – GPT-6.1 Sol (xhigh) |
|---|---|---|
| Geospatial Agent Index | 83* (partial: 1.7 of 3 attempts) | 78* (partial: 2 of 3 attempts) |
| GeoAgentBench score | 96 | 100 |
| GeoBenchX score | 66 | 64 |
| Earth-Bench score | 69 | 48 |
| GeoAnalystBench score | 100 | 100 |
| Raster and remote sensing score | 84 | 70 |
| Vector and overlay score | 83 | 78 |
| Networks and routing score | 100 | 100 |
| Climate and time series score | 79 | 72 |
| Spatial statistics and interpolation score | 62 | 62 |
| Mapping and cartography score | 76 | 73 |
| Recognising infeasible requests score | 59 | 66 |
| Cost per task | $0.175 | $0.124 |
| Time per task | 1.0 min | 3.0 min |
| Tokens per attempt | 127k | 201k |
| Turns per attempt | 5.7 | 9.0 |
| Attempts decided | 422 | 551 |
| Input price per 1M tokens | $4.00 | $2.00 |
| Output price per 1M tokens | $20.00 | $10.00 |
| Context window | No data | No data |
| Image input | No data | No data |
| Developer | Anthropic | OpenAI |
Charts
Geospatial Agent Index
Equal-weight average of the evaluation scores, 0 to 100 · Higher is better
First eight selected entries in metric order. Full results in table view.
Data table: Geospatial Agent Index
| Model | Creator | Geospatial Agent Index | Range while attempts are pending | Benchmarks covered | Coverage (attempts) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Code – Claude Opus 5.5 (high) | Anthropic | 83* (partial: 1.7 of 3 attempts) | 71 to 83 | 4 of 4 | 422 of 870 planned attempts |
| Codex – GPT-6.1 Sol (xhigh) | OpenAI | 78* (partial: 2 of 3 attempts) | 74 to 79 | 4 of 4 | 551 of 870 planned attempts |
Claude Code – Claude Opus 5.5 (high)
Codex – GPT-6.1 Sol (xhigh)Cost per task
Average cost per task (USD) · Lower is better
First eight selected entries in metric order. Full results in table view.
Data table: Cost per task
| Model | Creator | Cost per task | Coverage (attempts) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Code – Claude Opus 5.5 (high) | Anthropic | $0.175 | 496 of 870 planned attempts |
| Codex – GPT-6.1 Sol (xhigh) | OpenAI | $0.124 | 591 of 870 planned attempts |
Time per task
Average agent wall time per task · Lower is better
First eight selected entries in metric order. Full results in table view.
Data table: Time per task
| Model | Creator | Time per task | Coverage (attempts) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Code – Claude Opus 5.5 (high) | Anthropic | 1.0 min | 496 of 870 planned attempts |
| Codex – GPT-6.1 Sol (xhigh) | OpenAI | 3.0 min | 591 of 870 planned attempts |
Frequently asked questions
- Which scores higher on the Geospatial Agent Index, Claude Code – Claude Opus 5.5 (high) or Codex – GPT-6.1 Sol (xhigh)?
- Claude Code – Claude Opus 5.5 (high), at 83 against 78 for Codex – GPT-6.1 Sol (xhigh). Claude Code – Claude Opus 5.5 (high): 422 of 870 planned attempts. Codex – GPT-6.1 Sol (xhigh): 551 of 870 planned attempts. Coverage is partial; scores can change as more attempts are decided.
- Which is cheaper per task, Claude Code – Claude Opus 5.5 (high) or Codex – GPT-6.1 Sol (xhigh)?
- Codex – GPT-6.1 Sol (xhigh), at $0.124 against $0.175 for Claude Code – Claude Opus 5.5 (high).
- Which is faster per task, Claude Code – Claude Opus 5.5 (high) or Codex – GPT-6.1 Sol (xhigh)?
- Claude Code – Claude Opus 5.5 (high), at 1.0 min against 3.0 min for Codex – GPT-6.1 Sol (xhigh).
- Which has the larger context window, Claude Code – Claude Opus 5.5 (high) or Codex – GPT-6.1 Sol (xhigh)?
- Not known yet: Claude Code – Claude Opus 5.5 (high) has no context window data and Codex – GPT-6.1 Sol (xhigh) has no context window data.
More: Claude Code – Claude Opus 5.5 (high) · Codex – GPT-6.1 Sol (xhigh) · all comparisons