Terminus-2 – Gemma 4 26B A4B (thinking on) vs. Terminus-2 – GLM-4.7-Flash (thinking on): geospatial agent comparison
Comparison between Terminus-2 – Gemma 4 26B A4B (thinking on) 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 – Gemma 4 26B A4B (thinking on) | Terminus-2 – GLM-4.7-Flash (thinking on) |
|---|---|---|
| Geospatial Agent Index | 61* | 41* |
| GeoAgentBench score | 86 | 36 |
| GeoBenchX score | 55 | 39 |
| Earth-Bench score | 34 | 45 |
| GeoAnalystBench score | 68 | 42 |
| Raster and remote sensing score | 53 | 36 |
| Vector and overlay score | 79 | 36 |
| Networks and routing score | 100 | 20 |
| Climate and time series score | 50 | 55 |
| Spatial statistics and interpolation score | 75 | 40 |
| Mapping and cartography score | 83 | 54 |
| Recognising infeasible requests score | 44 | 36 |
| Cost per task | $0.014 | $0.027 |
| Time per task | 11.7 min | 10.0 min |
| Tokens per attempt | 101k | 357k |
| Turns per attempt | 9.2 | 16.6 |
| Attempts decided | 209 | 176 |
| Input price per 1M tokens | $0.10 | $0.06 |
| Output price per 1M tokens | $0.30 | $0.40 |
| Context window | 256,000 | 131,072 |
| Image input | Yes | No |
| Developer | Z.ai |
Charts
Axis Spatial Geospatial Agent Index
Equal-weight average of the evaluation scores, 0 to 100 · Higher is better
Data table: Axis Spatial Geospatial Agent Index
| Model | Creator | Geospatial Agent Index | Range while attempts are pending | Benchmarks covered | Coverage (attempts) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Terminus-2 – Gemma 4 26B A4B (thinking on) | 61* | 61 to 61 | 4 of 4 | 209 of 870 planned attempts | |
| Terminus-2 – GLM-4.7-Flash (thinking on) | Z.ai | 41* | No pending judgements; coverage incomplete | 4 of 4 | 176 of 870 planned attempts |
Terminus-2 – Gemma 4 26B A4B (thinking on)
Terminus-2 – GLM-4.7-Flash (thinking on)Cost per task
Average cost per task (USD) · Lower is better
Data table: Cost per task
| Model | Creator | Cost per task | Coverage (attempts) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Terminus-2 – Gemma 4 26B A4B (thinking on) | $0.014 | 210 of 870 planned attempts | |
| Terminus-2 – GLM-4.7-Flash (thinking on) | Z.ai | $0.027 | 176 of 870 planned attempts |
Time per task
Average agent wall time per task · Lower is better
Data table: Time per task
| Model | Creator | Time per task | Coverage (attempts) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Terminus-2 – Gemma 4 26B A4B (thinking on) | 11.7 min | 210 of 870 planned attempts | |
| Terminus-2 – GLM-4.7-Flash (thinking on) | Z.ai | 10.0 min | 176 of 870 planned attempts |
Frequently asked questions
- Which scores higher on the Geospatial Agent Index, Terminus-2 – Gemma 4 26B A4B (thinking on) or Terminus-2 – GLM-4.7-Flash (thinking on)?
- Terminus-2 – Gemma 4 26B A4B (thinking on), at 61 against 41 for Terminus-2 – GLM-4.7-Flash (thinking on). Terminus-2 – Gemma 4 26B A4B (thinking on): 209 of 870 planned attempts. Terminus-2 – GLM-4.7-Flash (thinking on): 176 of 870 planned attempts. Coverage is partial; scores can change as more attempts are decided.
- Which is cheaper per task, Terminus-2 – Gemma 4 26B A4B (thinking on) or Terminus-2 – GLM-4.7-Flash (thinking on)?
- Terminus-2 – Gemma 4 26B A4B (thinking on), at $0.014 against $0.027 for Terminus-2 – GLM-4.7-Flash (thinking on).
- Which is faster per task, Terminus-2 – Gemma 4 26B A4B (thinking on) or Terminus-2 – GLM-4.7-Flash (thinking on)?
- Terminus-2 – GLM-4.7-Flash (thinking on), at 10.0 min against 11.7 min for Terminus-2 – Gemma 4 26B A4B (thinking on).
- Which has the larger context window, Terminus-2 – Gemma 4 26B A4B (thinking on) or Terminus-2 – GLM-4.7-Flash (thinking on)?
- Terminus-2 – Gemma 4 26B A4B (thinking on), at 256,000 tokens against 131,072 tokens for Terminus-2 – GLM-4.7-Flash (thinking on).
More: Terminus-2 – Gemma 4 26B A4B (thinking on) · Terminus-2 – GLM-4.7-Flash (thinking on) · all comparisons