Axis Spatial

Terminus-2 – Claude Sonnet 4.6 (adaptive, effort high) vs. Terminus-2 – GLM-5.3-Flash (max): geospatial agent comparison

Comparison between Terminus-2 – Claude Sonnet 4.6 (adaptive, effort high) and Terminus-2 – GLM-5.3-Flash (max) 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. Terminus-2 – GLM-5.3-Flash (max)
MetricTerminus-2 – Claude Sonnet 4.6 (adaptive, effort high)Terminus-2 – GLM-5.3-Flash (max)
Geospatial Agent Index74* (partial: 1.1 of 3 attempts)56* (partial: 1.1 of 3 attempts)
GeoAgentBench score9782
GeoBenchX score5132
Earth-Bench score5429
GeoAnalystBench score9579
Raster and remote sensing score7251
Vector and overlay score7064
Networks and routing score10060
Climate and time series score8354
Spatial statistics and interpolation score7135
Mapping and cartography score7543
Recognising infeasible requests score3030
Cost per task$0.278$0.042
Time per task3.7 min17.3 min
Tokens per attempt71k374k
Turns per attempt6.313.4
Attempts decided306298
Input price per 1M tokens$3.00$0.15
Output price per 1M tokens$15.00$0.50
Context window1,000,0001,048,576
Image inputYesYes
DeveloperAnthropicZ.ai

Charts

Geospatial Agent Index

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

  • Partial coverage
Geospatial Agent IndexTerminus-2 – Claude Sonnet 4.6 (adaptive, effort high): 74* (partial coverage); Terminus-2 – GLM-5.3-Flash (max): 56* (partial coverage)025507510074*Claude Sonnet 4.6 (adaptive, effort high)56*GLM-5.3-Flash (max)
Data table: Geospatial Agent Index
Geospatial Agent Index
ModelCreatorGeospatial Agent IndexRange while attempts are pendingBenchmarks coveredCoverage (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)
Terminus-2 – GLM-5.3-Flash (max)Z.ai56* (partial: 1.1 of 3 attempts)54 to 564 of 4298 of 870 planned attempts

Cost per task

Average cost per task (USD) · Lower is better

  • Partial coverage
Cost per taskTerminus-2 – GLM-5.3-Flash (max): $0.042 (partial coverage); Terminus-2 – Claude Sonnet 4.6 (adaptive, effort high): $0.278 (partial coverage)$0$0.075$0.150$0.225$0.300$0.042GLM-5.3-Flash (max)$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)
Terminus-2 – GLM-5.3-Flash (max)Z.ai$0.042315 of 870 planned attempts

Time per task

Average agent wall time per task · Lower is better

  • Partial coverage
Time per taskTerminus-2 – Claude Sonnet 4.6 (adaptive, effort high): 3.7 min (partial coverage); Terminus-2 – GLM-5.3-Flash (max): 17.3 min (partial coverage)0m5m10m15m20m3.7 minClaude Sonnet 4.6 (adaptive, effort high)17.3 minGLM-5.3-Flash (max)
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)
Terminus-2 – GLM-5.3-Flash (max)Z.ai17.3 min315 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-5.3-Flash (max)?
Terminus-2 – Claude Sonnet 4.6 (adaptive, effort high), at 74 against 56 for Terminus-2 – GLM-5.3-Flash (max). Terminus-2 – Claude Sonnet 4.6 (adaptive, effort high): 306 of 870 planned attempts (133 excluded). Terminus-2 – GLM-5.3-Flash (max): 298 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-5.3-Flash (max)?
Terminus-2 – GLM-5.3-Flash (max), at $0.042 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-5.3-Flash (max)?
Terminus-2 – Claude Sonnet 4.6 (adaptive, effort high), at 3.7 min against 17.3 min for Terminus-2 – GLM-5.3-Flash (max).
Which has the larger context window, Terminus-2 – Claude Sonnet 4.6 (adaptive, effort high) or Terminus-2 – GLM-5.3-Flash (max)?
Terminus-2 – GLM-5.3-Flash (max), at 1,048,576 tokens against 1,000,000 tokens for Terminus-2 – Claude Sonnet 4.6 (adaptive, effort high).

More: Terminus-2 – Claude Sonnet 4.6 (adaptive, effort high) · Terminus-2 – GLM-5.3-Flash (max) · all comparisons