Axis Spatial

Terminus-2 – Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite (high) vs. Terminus-2 – Qwen 3.8 27B (xhigh): geospatial agent comparison

Comparison between Terminus-2 – Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite (high) and Terminus-2 – Qwen 3.8 27B (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 – Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite (high) vs. Terminus-2 – Qwen 3.8 27B (xhigh)
MetricTerminus-2 – Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite (high)Terminus-2 – Qwen 3.8 27B (xhigh)
Geospatial Agent Index59* (attempts per task: 3)62* (attempts per task: 1 on 101 of 290 tasks so far)
GeoAgentBench score6960
GeoBenchX score53No data
Earth-Bench score4327
GeoAnalystBench score70100
Raster and remote sensing score5436
Vector and overlay score6578
Networks and routing score6067
Climate and time series score5743
Spatial statistics and interpolation score4662
Mapping and cartography score66100
Recognising infeasible requests score48No data
Cost per task$0.021$0.066
Time per task1.9 min19.8 min
Tokens per attempt52k90k
Turns per attempt5.98.2
Attempts decided864101
Input price per 1M tokens$0.25$0.45
Output price per 1M tokens$1.50$3.20
Context window1,048,576262,144
Image inputYesYes
DeveloperGoogleAlibaba (Qwen)

Charts

Geospatial Agent Index

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

  • Partial coverage
Geospatial Agent IndexTerminus-2 – Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite (high): 59* (partial coverage); Terminus-2 – Qwen 3.8 27B (xhigh): 62* (partial coverage)025507510059*Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite (high)62*Qwen 3.8 27B (xhigh)
Data table: Geospatial Agent Index
Geospatial Agent Index
ModelCreatorGeospatial Agent IndexRange while attempts are pendingBenchmarks coveredCoverage (attempts)
Terminus-2 – Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite (high)Google59* (attempts per task: 3)59 to 594 of 4864 of 870 planned attempts (6 excluded)
Terminus-2 – Qwen 3.8 27B (xhigh)Alibaba (Qwen)62* (attempts per task: 1 on 101 of 290 tasks so far)No pending judgements; coverage incomplete3 of 4101 of 870 planned attempts

Cost per task

Average cost per task (USD) · Lower is better

  • Partial coverage
Cost per taskTerminus-2 – Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite (high): $0.021 (partial coverage); Terminus-2 – Qwen 3.8 27B (xhigh): $0.066 (partial coverage)$0$0.020$0.040$0.060$0.080$0.021Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite (high)$0.066Qwen 3.8 27B (xhigh)
Data table: Cost per task
Cost per task
ModelCreatorCost per taskCoverage (attempts)
Terminus-2 – Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite (high)Google$0.021865 of 870 planned attempts (6 excluded)
Terminus-2 – Qwen 3.8 27B (xhigh)Alibaba (Qwen)$0.066101 of 870 planned attempts

Time per task

Average agent wall time per task · Lower is better

  • Partial coverage
Time per taskTerminus-2 – Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite (high): 1.9 min (partial coverage); Terminus-2 – Qwen 3.8 27B (xhigh): 19.8 min (partial coverage)0m5m10m15m20m1.9 minGemini 3.1 Flash-Lite (high)19.8 minQwen 3.8 27B (xhigh)
Data table: Time per task
Time per task
ModelCreatorTime per taskCoverage (attempts)
Terminus-2 – Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite (high)Google1.9 min865 of 870 planned attempts (6 excluded)
Terminus-2 – Qwen 3.8 27B (xhigh)Alibaba (Qwen)19.8 min101 of 870 planned attempts

Frequently asked questions

Which scores higher on the Geospatial Agent Index, Terminus-2 – Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite (high) or Terminus-2 – Qwen 3.8 27B (xhigh)?
Not comparable yet: Terminus-2 – Qwen 3.8 27B (xhigh) has scores on 3 of 4 benchmarks, so it is not yet ranked. Terminus-2 – Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite (high): 864 of 870 planned attempts (6 excluded). Terminus-2 – Qwen 3.8 27B (xhigh): 101 of 870 planned attempts. Coverage is partial; scores can change as more attempts are decided.
Which is cheaper per task, Terminus-2 – Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite (high) or Terminus-2 – Qwen 3.8 27B (xhigh)?
Terminus-2 – Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite (high), at $0.021 against $0.066 for Terminus-2 – Qwen 3.8 27B (xhigh).
Which is faster per task, Terminus-2 – Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite (high) or Terminus-2 – Qwen 3.8 27B (xhigh)?
Terminus-2 – Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite (high), at 1.9 min against 19.8 min for Terminus-2 – Qwen 3.8 27B (xhigh).
Which has the larger context window, Terminus-2 – Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite (high) or Terminus-2 – Qwen 3.8 27B (xhigh)?
Terminus-2 – Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite (high), at 1,048,576 tokens against 262,144 tokens for Terminus-2 – Qwen 3.8 27B (xhigh).

More: Terminus-2 – Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite (high) · Terminus-2 – Qwen 3.8 27B (xhigh) · all comparisons