Claude Code – Claude Sonnet 5 (high) vs. Codex – GPT-6.1 Sol (high): geospatial agent comparison

Comparison between Claude Code – Claude Sonnet 5 (high) and Codex – GPT-6.1 Sol (high) 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 (high) vs. Codex – GPT-6.1 Sol (high)
Metric	Claude Code – Claude Sonnet 5 (high)	Codex – GPT-6.1 Sol (high)
Geospatial Agent Index	56* (partial: attempt 1 on 104 of 320 tasks)	63*
Earth-Bench V2 score	56	58
GeoBenchX score	56	67
GeoAgentBench score (guided GIS workflow; outside the index)	100	100
GeoAnalystBench score (guided GIS workflow; outside the index)	83	100
Raster and remote sensing score	52	54
Vector and overlay score	0	50
Networks and routing score	No data	No data
Climate and time series score	67	66
Spatial statistics and interpolation score	50	29
Mapping and cartography score	80	78
Recognising infeasible requests score	41	67
Cost per task	$0.331	$0.081
Time per task	2.8 min	1.8 min
Tokens per attempt	555k	149k
Turns per attempt	13.1	7.8
Attempts decided	104	320
Input price per 1M tokens	$2.00	$2.00
Output price per 1M tokens	$10.00	$10.00
Context window	No data	No data
Image input	No data	No data
Developer	Anthropic	OpenAI

Charts

Partial coverage. Claude Code – Claude Sonnet 5 (high): 41 of 147 Earth-Bench V2 tasks; 63 of 173 GeoBenchX tasks. Grey placeholders identify these entries in the index, cost and time charts; their height does not represent a value. Comparable bars appear when first-attempt coverage is complete. Their available results remain in the side-by-side table.

Geospatial Agent Index

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

Planned attempts still to come

Data table: Geospatial Agent Index

Geospatial Agent Index
Model	Creator	Geospatial Agent Index	Range while attempts are pending	Benchmarks covered	Coverage (attempts)
Codex – GPT-6.1 Sol (high)	OpenAI	63*	No pending judgements; coverage incomplete	2 of 2	320 of 614 planned attempts

Cost per task

Average cost per task (USD) · Lower is better

Planned attempts still to come

How to read this chart

Not shown: partial coverage. Claude Code – Claude Sonnet 5 (high).

Data table: Cost per task

Cost per task
Model	Creator	Cost per task	Coverage (attempts)
Codex – GPT-6.1 Sol (high)	OpenAI	$0.081	320 of 614 planned attempts

Time per task

Average agent wall time per task · Lower is better

Planned attempts still to come

How to read this chart

Not shown: partial coverage. Claude Code – Claude Sonnet 5 (high).

Data table: Time per task

Time per task
Model	Creator	Time per task	Coverage (attempts)
Codex – GPT-6.1 Sol (high)	OpenAI	1.8 min	320 of 614 planned attempts

Frequently asked questions

Which scores higher on the Geospatial Agent Index, Claude Code – Claude Sonnet 5 (high) or Codex – GPT-6.1 Sol (high)?

Not comparable yet: Claude Code – Claude Sonnet 5 (high) has partial coverage (41 of 147 Earth-Bench V2 tasks; 63 of 173 GeoBenchX tasks), so it is not ranked. Claude Code – Claude Sonnet 5 (high): 104 of 614 planned attempts. Codex – GPT-6.1 Sol (high): 320 of 614 planned attempts. Coverage is partial; scores can change as more attempts are decided.

Which is cheaper per task, Claude Code – Claude Sonnet 5 (high) or Codex – GPT-6.1 Sol (high)?

Codex – GPT-6.1 Sol (high), at $0.081 against $0.331 for Claude Code – Claude Sonnet 5 (high).

Which is faster per task, Claude Code – Claude Sonnet 5 (high) or Codex – GPT-6.1 Sol (high)?

Codex – GPT-6.1 Sol (high), at 1.8 min against 2.8 min for Claude Code – Claude Sonnet 5 (high).

Which has the larger context window, Claude Code – Claude Sonnet 5 (high) or Codex – GPT-6.1 Sol (high)?

Not known yet: Claude Code – Claude Sonnet 5 (high) has no context window data and Codex – GPT-6.1 Sol (high) has no context window data.

More: Claude Code – Claude Sonnet 5 (high) · Codex – GPT-6.1 Sol (high) · all comparisons