Terminus-2 – DeepSeek V4 Pro (high) vs. Terminus-2 – GLM-5.3-Flash (low): geospatial agent comparison
Comparison between Terminus-2 – DeepSeek V4 Pro (high) and Terminus-2 – GLM-5.3-Flash (low) 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 – DeepSeek V4 Pro (high) | Terminus-2 – GLM-5.3-Flash (low) |
|---|---|---|
| Geospatial Agent Index | 74 | 66* (partial: 1.1 of 3 attempts) |
| GeoAgentBench score | 95 | 94 |
| GeoBenchX score | 54 | 47 |
| Earth-Bench score | 53 | 27 |
| GeoAnalystBench score | 95 | 94 |
| Raster and remote sensing score | 74 | 61 |
| Vector and overlay score | 72 | 69 |
| Networks and routing score | 93 | 100 |
| Climate and time series score | 71 | 54 |
| Spatial statistics and interpolation score | 50 | 48 |
| Mapping and cartography score | 70 | 67 |
| Recognising infeasible requests score | 46 | 35 |
| Cost per task | $0.273 | $0.028 |
| Time per task | 7.4 min | 9.8 min |
| Tokens per attempt | 216k | 278k |
| Turns per attempt | 12.8 | 12.1 |
| Attempts decided | 870 | 288 |
| Input price per 1M tokens | $1.32 | $0.15 |
| Output price per 1M tokens | $3.96 | $0.50 |
| Context window | 1,048,576 | 1,048,576 |
| Image input | No | Yes |
| Developer | DeepSeek | 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 – DeepSeek V4 Pro (high) | DeepSeek | 74 | No pending judgements | 4 of 4 | 870 of 870 planned attempts |
| Terminus-2 – GLM-5.3-Flash (low) | Z.ai | 66* (partial: 1.1 of 3 attempts) | 59 to 67 | 4 of 4 | 288 of 870 planned attempts (3 excluded) |
Terminus-2 – DeepSeek V4 Pro (high)
Terminus-2 – GLM-5.3-Flash (low)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 – DeepSeek V4 Pro (high) | DeepSeek | $0.273 | 870 of 870 planned attempts |
| Terminus-2 – GLM-5.3-Flash (low) | Z.ai | $0.028 | 325 of 870 planned attempts (3 excluded) |
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 – DeepSeek V4 Pro (high) | DeepSeek | 7.4 min | 870 of 870 planned attempts |
| Terminus-2 – GLM-5.3-Flash (low) | Z.ai | 9.8 min | 325 of 870 planned attempts (3 excluded) |
Frequently asked questions
- Which scores higher on the Geospatial Agent Index, Terminus-2 – DeepSeek V4 Pro (high) or Terminus-2 – GLM-5.3-Flash (low)?
- Terminus-2 – DeepSeek V4 Pro (high), at 74 against 66 for Terminus-2 – GLM-5.3-Flash (low). Terminus-2 – DeepSeek V4 Pro (high): 870 of 870 planned attempts. Terminus-2 – GLM-5.3-Flash (low): 288 of 870 planned attempts (3 excluded). Coverage is partial; scores can change as more attempts are decided.
- Which is cheaper per task, Terminus-2 – DeepSeek V4 Pro (high) or Terminus-2 – GLM-5.3-Flash (low)?
- Terminus-2 – GLM-5.3-Flash (low), at $0.028 against $0.273 for Terminus-2 – DeepSeek V4 Pro (high).
- Which is faster per task, Terminus-2 – DeepSeek V4 Pro (high) or Terminus-2 – GLM-5.3-Flash (low)?
- Terminus-2 – DeepSeek V4 Pro (high), at 7.4 min against 9.8 min for Terminus-2 – GLM-5.3-Flash (low).
- Which has the larger context window, Terminus-2 – DeepSeek V4 Pro (high) or Terminus-2 – GLM-5.3-Flash (low)?
- They are level, at 1,048,576 tokens.
More: Terminus-2 – DeepSeek V4 Pro (high) · Terminus-2 – GLM-5.3-Flash (low) · all comparisons