Axis Spatial

Terminus-2 – Claude Sonnet 4.6 (adaptive, effort high) vs. Codex – GPT-6.1 Sol (xhigh): geospatial agent comparison

Comparison between Terminus-2 – Claude Sonnet 4.6 (adaptive, effort 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

Terminus-2 – Claude Sonnet 4.6 (adaptive, effort high) vs. Codex – GPT-6.1 Sol (xhigh)
MetricTerminus-2 – Claude Sonnet 4.6 (adaptive, effort high)Codex – GPT-6.1 Sol (xhigh)
Geospatial Agent Index74* (partial: 1.1 of 3 attempts)78* (partial: 2 of 3 attempts)
GeoAgentBench score97100
GeoBenchX score5164
Earth-Bench score5448
GeoAnalystBench score95100
Raster and remote sensing score7270
Vector and overlay score7078
Networks and routing score100100
Climate and time series score8372
Spatial statistics and interpolation score7162
Mapping and cartography score7573
Recognising infeasible requests score3066
Cost per task$0.278$0.124
Time per task3.7 min3.0 min
Tokens per attempt71k201k
Turns per attempt6.39.0
Attempts decided306551
Input price per 1M tokens$3.00$2.00
Output price per 1M tokens$15.00$10.00
Context window1,000,000No data
Image inputYesNo 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-6.1 Sol (xhigh): 78* (partial coverage); Terminus-2 – Claude Sonnet 4.6 (adaptive, effort high): 74* (partial coverage)025507510078*GPT-6.1 Sol (xhigh)74*Claude Sonnet 4.6 (adaptive, effort high)
Data table: Geospatial Agent Index
Geospatial Agent Index
ModelCreatorGeospatial Agent IndexRange while attempts are pendingBenchmarks coveredCoverage (attempts)
Codex – GPT-6.1 Sol (xhigh)OpenAI78* (partial: 2 of 3 attempts)74 to 794 of 4551 of 870 planned attempts
Terminus-2 – Claude Sonnet 4.6 (adaptive, effort high)Anthropic74* (partial: 1.1 of 3 attempts)73 to 754 of 4306 of 870 planned attempts (133 excluded)

Cost per task

Average cost per task (USD) · Lower is better

  • Partial coverage
Cost per taskCodex – GPT-6.1 Sol (xhigh): $0.124 (partial coverage); Terminus-2 – Claude Sonnet 4.6 (adaptive, effort high): $0.278 (partial coverage)$0$0.075$0.150$0.225$0.300$0.124GPT-6.1 Sol (xhigh)$0.278Claude Sonnet 4.6 (adaptive, effort high)
Data table: Cost per task
Cost per task
ModelCreatorCost per taskCoverage (attempts)
Terminus-2 – Claude Sonnet 4.6 (adaptive, effort high)Anthropic$0.278321 of 870 planned attempts (133 excluded)
Codex – GPT-6.1 Sol (xhigh)OpenAI$0.124591 of 870 planned attempts

Time per task

Average agent wall time per task · Lower is better

  • Partial coverage
Time per taskCodex – GPT-6.1 Sol (xhigh): 3.0 min (partial coverage); Terminus-2 – Claude Sonnet 4.6 (adaptive, effort high): 3.7 min (partial coverage)0m1m2m3m4m3.0 minGPT-6.1 Sol (xhigh)3.7 minClaude Sonnet 4.6 (adaptive, effort high)
Data table: Time per task
Time per task
ModelCreatorTime per taskCoverage (attempts)
Terminus-2 – Claude Sonnet 4.6 (adaptive, effort high)Anthropic3.7 min321 of 870 planned attempts (133 excluded)
Codex – GPT-6.1 Sol (xhigh)OpenAI3.0 min591 of 870 planned attempts

Frequently asked questions

Which scores higher on the Geospatial Agent Index, Terminus-2 – Claude Sonnet 4.6 (adaptive, effort high) or Codex – GPT-6.1 Sol (xhigh)?
Codex – GPT-6.1 Sol (xhigh), at 78 against 74 for Terminus-2 – Claude Sonnet 4.6 (adaptive, effort high). Terminus-2 – Claude Sonnet 4.6 (adaptive, effort high): 306 of 870 planned attempts (133 excluded). 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, Terminus-2 – Claude Sonnet 4.6 (adaptive, effort high) or Codex – GPT-6.1 Sol (xhigh)?
Codex – GPT-6.1 Sol (xhigh), at $0.124 against $0.278 for Terminus-2 – Claude Sonnet 4.6 (adaptive, effort high).
Which is faster per task, Terminus-2 – Claude Sonnet 4.6 (adaptive, effort high) or Codex – GPT-6.1 Sol (xhigh)?
Codex – GPT-6.1 Sol (xhigh), at 3.0 min against 3.7 min for Terminus-2 – Claude Sonnet 4.6 (adaptive, effort high).
Which has the larger context window, Terminus-2 – Claude Sonnet 4.6 (adaptive, effort high) or Codex – GPT-6.1 Sol (xhigh)?
Not known yet: Codex – GPT-6.1 Sol (xhigh) has no context window data.

More: Terminus-2 – Claude Sonnet 4.6 (adaptive, effort high) · Codex – GPT-6.1 Sol (xhigh) · all comparisons