Terminus-2 – Gemini 3.8 Flash (low) vs. Terminus-2 – GLM-5.3-Flash (low): geospatial agent comparison
Comparison between Terminus-2 – Gemini 3.8 Flash (low) 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 – Gemini 3.8 Flash (low) | Terminus-2 – GLM-5.3-Flash (low) |
|---|---|---|
| Geospatial Agent Index | 64* (attempts per task: 2.9) | 62* (attempts per task: 1.6) |
| GeoAgentBench score | 96 | 90 |
| GeoBenchX score | 61 | 43 |
| Earth-Bench score | 37 | 25 |
| GeoAnalystBench score | 63 | 89 |
| Raster and remote sensing score | 62 | 62 |
| Vector and overlay score | 63 | 67 |
| Networks and routing score | 100 | 100 |
| Climate and time series score | 51 | 58 |
| Spatial statistics and interpolation score | 43 | 29 |
| Mapping and cartography score | 53 | 62 |
| Recognising infeasible requests score | 83 | 35 |
| Cost per task | $0.115 | $0.027 |
| Time per task | 2.7 min | 9.9 min |
| Tokens per attempt | 314k | 260k |
| Turns per attempt | 17.9 | 11.8 |
| Attempts decided | 833 | 298 |
| Input price per 1M tokens | $0.75 | $0.15 |
| Output price per 1M tokens | $3.75 | $0.50 |
| Context window | 1,048,576 | 1,048,576 |
| Image input | Yes | Yes |
| Developer | 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 – Gemini 3.8 Flash (low) | 64* (attempts per task: 2.9) | No pending judgements; coverage incomplete | 4 of 4 | 833 of 1,167 planned attempts (74 excluded) | |
| Terminus-2 – GLM-5.3-Flash (low) | Z.ai | 62* (attempts per task: 1.6) | 45 to 72 | 4 of 4 | 298 of 1,167 planned attempts (10 excluded) |
Terminus-2 – Gemini 3.8 Flash (low)
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 – Gemini 3.8 Flash (low) | $0.115 | 833 of 1,167 planned attempts (74 excluded) | |
| Terminus-2 – GLM-5.3-Flash (low) | Z.ai | $0.027 | 452 of 1,167 planned attempts (10 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 – Gemini 3.8 Flash (low) | 2.7 min | 833 of 1,167 planned attempts (74 excluded) | |
| Terminus-2 – GLM-5.3-Flash (low) | Z.ai | 9.9 min | 452 of 1,167 planned attempts (10 excluded) |
Frequently asked questions
Which scores higher on the Geospatial Agent Index, Terminus-2 – Gemini 3.8 Flash (low) or Terminus-2 – GLM-5.3-Flash (low)?
Terminus-2 – Gemini 3.8 Flash (low), at 64 against 62 for Terminus-2 – GLM-5.3-Flash (low). Terminus-2 – Gemini 3.8 Flash (low): 833 of 1,167 planned attempts (74 excluded). Terminus-2 – GLM-5.3-Flash (low): 298 of 1,167 planned attempts (10 excluded). Coverage is partial; scores can change as more attempts are decided.
Which is cheaper per task, Terminus-2 – Gemini 3.8 Flash (low) or Terminus-2 – GLM-5.3-Flash (low)?
Terminus-2 – GLM-5.3-Flash (low), at $0.027 against $0.115 for Terminus-2 – Gemini 3.8 Flash (low).
Which is faster per task, Terminus-2 – Gemini 3.8 Flash (low) or Terminus-2 – GLM-5.3-Flash (low)?
Terminus-2 – Gemini 3.8 Flash (low), at 2.7 min against 9.9 min for Terminus-2 – GLM-5.3-Flash (low).
Which has the larger context window, Terminus-2 – Gemini 3.8 Flash (low) or Terminus-2 – GLM-5.3-Flash (low)?
They are level, at 1,048,576 tokens.
More: Terminus-2 – Gemini 3.8 Flash (low) · Terminus-2 – GLM-5.3-Flash (low) · all comparisons