Axis Spatial

Claude Code – Claude Sonnet 5.5 (xhigh) vs. Codex – GPT-6 Luna (xhigh): geospatial agent comparison

Comparison between Claude Code – Claude Sonnet 5.5 (xhigh) and Codex – GPT-6 Luna (xhigh) on the Geospatial Agent Index, each benchmark, cost, time and token use, from the same tasks, agent and limits. Methodology.

Side by side

Claude Code – Claude Sonnet 5.5 (xhigh) vs. Codex – GPT-6 Luna (xhigh)
MetricClaude Code – Claude Sonnet 5.5 (xhigh)Codex – GPT-6 Luna (xhigh)
Geospatial Agent Index74 (partial: 1 of 3 attempts)77* (partial: 1.9 of 3 attempts)
GeoAgentBench score9499
GeoBenchX score6560
Earth-Bench score4855
GeoAnalystBench score8995
Raster and remote sensing score7175
Vector and overlay score6778
Networks and routing score100100
Climate and time series score7175
Spatial statistics and interpolation score5863
Mapping and cartography score7564
Recognising infeasible requests score6362
Cost per task$0.163$0.0092
Time per task1.4 min3.4 min
Tokens per attempt217k236k
Turns per attempt7.99.8
Attempts decided290512
Input price per 1M tokens$2.00$0.10
Output price per 1M tokens$10.00$0.50
Context windowNo dataNo data
Image inputNo dataNo data
DeveloperAnthropicOpenAI

Charts

Geospatial Agent Index

Equal-weight average of the evaluation scores, 0 to 100 · Higher is better

  • Partial coverage
Geospatial Agent IndexCodex – GPT-6 Luna (xhigh): 77* (partial coverage); Claude Code – Claude Sonnet 5.5 (xhigh): 74025507510077*GPT-6 Luna (xhigh)74Claude Sonnet 5.5 (xhigh)
Data table: Geospatial Agent Index
Geospatial Agent Index
ModelCreatorGeospatial Agent IndexRange while attempts are pendingBenchmarks coveredCoverage (attempts)
Codex – GPT-6 Luna (xhigh)OpenAI77* (partial: 1.9 of 3 attempts)72 to 784 of 4512 of 870 planned attempts
Claude Code – Claude Sonnet 5.5 (xhigh)Anthropic74 (partial: 1 of 3 attempts)No pending judgements4 of 4290 of 290 planned attempts

Cost per task

Average cost per task (USD) · Lower is better

  • Partial coverage
Cost per taskCodex – GPT-6 Luna (xhigh): $0.0092 (partial coverage); Claude Code – Claude Sonnet 5.5 (xhigh): $0.163$0$0.050$0.100$0.150$0.200$0.0092GPT-6 Luna (xhigh)$0.163Claude Sonnet 5.5 (xhigh)
Data table: Cost per task
Cost per task
ModelCreatorCost per taskCoverage (attempts)
Claude Code – Claude Sonnet 5.5 (xhigh)Anthropic$0.163290 of 290 planned attempts
Codex – GPT-6 Luna (xhigh)OpenAI$0.0092560 of 870 planned attempts

Time per task

Average agent wall time per task · Lower is better

  • Partial coverage
Time per taskClaude Code – Claude Sonnet 5.5 (xhigh): 1.4 min; Codex – GPT-6 Luna (xhigh): 3.4 min (partial coverage)0m1m2m3m4m1.4 minClaude Sonnet 5.5 (xhigh)3.4 minGPT-6 Luna (xhigh)
Data table: Time per task
Time per task
ModelCreatorTime per taskCoverage (attempts)
Claude Code – Claude Sonnet 5.5 (xhigh)Anthropic1.4 min290 of 290 planned attempts
Codex – GPT-6 Luna (xhigh)OpenAI3.4 min560 of 870 planned attempts

Frequently asked questions

Which scores higher on the Geospatial Agent Index, Claude Code – Claude Sonnet 5.5 (xhigh) or Codex – GPT-6 Luna (xhigh)?
Codex – GPT-6 Luna (xhigh), at 77 against 74 for Claude Code – Claude Sonnet 5.5 (xhigh). Claude Code – Claude Sonnet 5.5 (xhigh): 290 of 290 planned attempts. Codex – GPT-6 Luna (xhigh): 512 of 870 planned attempts. Coverage is partial; scores can change as more attempts are decided.
Which is cheaper per task, Claude Code – Claude Sonnet 5.5 (xhigh) or Codex – GPT-6 Luna (xhigh)?
Codex – GPT-6 Luna (xhigh), at $0.0092 against $0.163 for Claude Code – Claude Sonnet 5.5 (xhigh).
Which is faster per task, Claude Code – Claude Sonnet 5.5 (xhigh) or Codex – GPT-6 Luna (xhigh)?
Claude Code – Claude Sonnet 5.5 (xhigh), at 1.4 min against 3.4 min for Codex – GPT-6 Luna (xhigh).
Which has the larger context window, Claude Code – Claude Sonnet 5.5 (xhigh) or Codex – GPT-6 Luna (xhigh)?
Not known yet: Claude Code – Claude Sonnet 5.5 (xhigh) has no context window data and Codex – GPT-6 Luna (xhigh) has no context window data.

More: Claude Code – Claude Sonnet 5.5 (xhigh) · Codex – GPT-6 Luna (xhigh) · all comparisons