Terminus-2 – Claude Sonnet 4.6 (adaptive, effort high) vs. Terminus-2 – GLM-4.7-Flash (thinking on): geospatial agent comparison
Comparison between Terminus-2 – Claude Sonnet 4.6 (adaptive, effort high) and Terminus-2 – GLM-4.7-Flash (thinking on) on the Geospatial Agent Index, each benchmark, cost, time and token use, from the same tasks, agent and limits. Methodology.
Side by side
| Metric | Terminus-2 – Claude Sonnet 4.6 (adaptive, effort high) | Terminus-2 – GLM-4.7-Flash (thinking on) |
|---|---|---|
| Geospatial Agent Index | 74* (partial: 1.1 of 3 attempts) | 40 |
| GeoAgentBench score | 97 | 43 |
| GeoBenchX score | 51 | 39 |
| Earth-Bench score | 54 | 35 |
| GeoAnalystBench score | 95 | 42 |
| Raster and remote sensing score | 72 | 36 |
| Vector and overlay score | 70 | 46 |
| Networks and routing score | 100 | 33 |
| Climate and time series score | 83 | 44 |
| Spatial statistics and interpolation score | 71 | 29 |
| Mapping and cartography score | 75 | 50 |
| Recognising infeasible requests score | 30 | 33 |
| Cost per task | $0.278 | $0.030 |
| Time per task | 3.7 min | 9.2 min |
| Tokens per attempt | 71k | 419k |
| Turns per attempt | 6.3 | 17.9 |
| Attempts decided | 306 | 870 |
| Input price per 1M tokens | $3.00 | $0.06 |
| Output price per 1M tokens | $15.00 | $0.40 |
| Context window | 1,000,000 | 131,072 |
| Image input | Yes | No |
| Developer | Anthropic | Z.ai |
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) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Terminus-2 – Claude Sonnet 4.6 (adaptive, effort high) | Anthropic | 74* (partial: 1.1 of 3 attempts) | 73 to 75 | 4 of 4 | 306 of 870 planned attempts (133 excluded) |
| Terminus-2 – GLM-4.7-Flash (thinking on) | Z.ai | 40 | No pending judgements | 4 of 4 | 870 of 870 planned attempts |
Terminus-2 – Claude Sonnet 4.6 (adaptive, effort high)
Terminus-2 – GLM-4.7-Flash (thinking on)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) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Terminus-2 – Claude Sonnet 4.6 (adaptive, effort high) | Anthropic | $0.278 | 321 of 870 planned attempts (133 excluded) |
| Terminus-2 – GLM-4.7-Flash (thinking on) | Z.ai | $0.030 | 870 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) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Terminus-2 – Claude Sonnet 4.6 (adaptive, effort high) | Anthropic | 3.7 min | 321 of 870 planned attempts (133 excluded) |
| Terminus-2 – GLM-4.7-Flash (thinking on) | Z.ai | 9.2 min | 870 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 Terminus-2 – GLM-4.7-Flash (thinking on)?
- Terminus-2 – Claude Sonnet 4.6 (adaptive, effort high), at 74 against 40 for Terminus-2 – GLM-4.7-Flash (thinking on). Terminus-2 – Claude Sonnet 4.6 (adaptive, effort high): 306 of 870 planned attempts (133 excluded). Terminus-2 – GLM-4.7-Flash (thinking on): 870 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 Terminus-2 – GLM-4.7-Flash (thinking on)?
- Terminus-2 – GLM-4.7-Flash (thinking on), at $0.030 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 Terminus-2 – GLM-4.7-Flash (thinking on)?
- Terminus-2 – Claude Sonnet 4.6 (adaptive, effort high), at 3.7 min against 9.2 min for Terminus-2 – GLM-4.7-Flash (thinking on).
- Which has the larger context window, Terminus-2 – Claude Sonnet 4.6 (adaptive, effort high) or Terminus-2 – GLM-4.7-Flash (thinking on)?
- Terminus-2 – Claude Sonnet 4.6 (adaptive, effort high), at 1,000,000 tokens against 131,072 tokens for Terminus-2 – GLM-4.7-Flash (thinking on).
More: Terminus-2 – Claude Sonnet 4.6 (adaptive, effort high) · Terminus-2 – GLM-4.7-Flash (thinking on) · all comparisons