Claude Code – GLM-5.3-Flash (max) vs. Claude Code – Claude Sonnet 5 (high): geospatial agent comparison
Comparison between Claude Code – GLM-5.3-Flash (max) and Claude Code – Claude Sonnet 5 (high) 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 – GLM-5.3-Flash (max) | Claude Code – Claude Sonnet 5 (high) |
|---|---|---|
| Geospatial Agent Index | 41* (partial: attempt 1 on 135 of 565 tasks) | 55* (partial: attempt 1 on 114 of 565 tasks) |
| Earth-Bench V2 score | 43 | 52 |
| GeoBenchX score | 38 | 58 |
| GS-QA2 score | No data | No data |
| GeoAgentBench score (guided GIS workflow; outside the index) | No data | 100 |
| GeoAnalystBench score (guided GIS workflow; outside the index) | No data | 83 |
| Raster and remote sensing score | 44 | 49 |
| Vector and overlay score | 50 | 0 |
| Networks and routing score | No data | No data |
| Climate and time series score | 67 | 61 |
| Spatial statistics and interpolation score | 0 | 50 |
| Mapping and cartography score | 0 | 80 |
| Recognising infeasible requests score | 44 | 47 |
| Cost per task | $0.139 | $0.334 |
| Time per task | 18.3 min | 2.8 min |
| Tokens per attempt | 1.26M | 555k |
| Turns per attempt | 25.9 | 13.0 |
| Attempts decided | 89 | 112 |
| Input price per 1M tokens | $0.15 | $2.00 |
| Output price per 1M tokens | $0.50 | $10.00 |
| Context window | 1,048,576 | No data |
| Image input | Yes | No data |
| Developer | Z.ai | Anthropic |
Charts
Partial coverage. Claude Code – GLM-5.3-Flash (max): 21 of 147 Earth-Bench V2 tasks; 114 of 173 GeoBenchX tasks; GS-QA2 incomplete; Claude Code – Claude Sonnet 5 (high): 46 of 147 Earth-Bench V2 tasks; 68 of 173 GeoBenchX tasks; GS-QA2 being added. Grey placeholders identify these entries in the index, cost and output token 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
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) |
|---|
Cost per task
Average cost per task (USD) · Lower is better
First eight selected entries in metric order. Full results in table view.
How to read this chart
Not shown: partial coverage. Claude Code – GLM-5.3-Flash (max), Claude Code – Claude Sonnet 5 (high).
Data table: Cost per task
| Model | Creator | Cost per task | Coverage (attempts) |
|---|
Output tokens per task
Average output tokens per attempt, reasoning included · Lower is better
First eight selected entries in metric order. Full results in table view.
How to read this chart
Not shown: partial coverage. Claude Code – GLM-5.3-Flash (max), Claude Code – Claude Sonnet 5 (high).
Data table: Output tokens per task
| Model | Creator | Output tokens per task | Coverage (attempts) |
|---|
Frequently asked questions
Which scores higher on the Geospatial Agent Index, Claude Code – GLM-5.3-Flash (max) or Claude Code – Claude Sonnet 5 (high)?
Which is cheaper per task, Claude Code – GLM-5.3-Flash (max) or Claude Code – Claude Sonnet 5 (high)?
Which writes fewer output tokens per task, Claude Code – GLM-5.3-Flash (max) or Claude Code – Claude Sonnet 5 (high)?
Which has the larger context window, Claude Code – GLM-5.3-Flash (max) or Claude Code – Claude Sonnet 5 (high)?
More: Claude Code – GLM-5.3-Flash (max) · Claude Code – Claude Sonnet 5 (high) · all comparisons