Terminus-2 – GLM-4.7-Flash (Reasoning) vs. Terminus-2 – Kimi K2.7 Code (Reasoning): geospatial agent comparison
Comparison between Terminus-2 – GLM-4.7-Flash (Reasoning) and Terminus-2 – Kimi K2.7 Code (Reasoning) 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 – GLM-4.7-Flash (Reasoning) | Terminus-2 – Kimi K2.7 Code (Reasoning) |
|---|---|---|
| Geospatial Agent Index | 43* | 73* |
| GeoAgentBench score | 36 | 90 |
| GeoBenchX score | 46 | 54 |
| Earth-Bench score | 48 | 62 |
| GeoAnalystBench score | 42 | 84 |
| Raster and remote sensing score | 39 | 74 |
| Vector and overlay score | 36 | 78 |
| Networks and routing score | 20 | 80 |
| Climate and time series score | 54 | 79 |
| Spatial statistics and interpolation score | 46 | 63 |
| Mapping and cartography score | 58 | 70 |
| Recognising infeasible requests score | 36 | 41 |
| Cost per task | $0.025 | $0.126 |
| Time per task | 9.5 min | 6.7 min |
| Tokens per attempt | 332k | 309k |
| Turns per attempt | 15.8 | 14.5 |
| Attempts decided | 143 | 249 |
| Input price per 1M tokens | $0.06 | $0.95 |
| Output price per 1M tokens | $0.40 | $4.00 |
| Context window | 131,072 | 262,144 |
| Image input | No | Yes |
| Developer | Z.ai | Moonshot 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 – Kimi K2.7 Code (Reasoning) | Moonshot AI | 73* | No pending judgements; coverage incomplete | 4 of 4 | 249 of 870 planned attempts |
| Terminus-2 – GLM-4.7-Flash (Reasoning) | Z.ai | 43* | 43 to 44 | 4 of 4 | 143 of 870 planned attempts |
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 – GLM-4.7-Flash (Reasoning) | Z.ai | $0.025 | 144 of 870 planned attempts |
| Terminus-2 – Kimi K2.7 Code (Reasoning) | Moonshot AI | $0.126 | 249 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 – GLM-4.7-Flash (Reasoning) | Z.ai | 9.5 min | 144 of 870 planned attempts |
| Terminus-2 – Kimi K2.7 Code (Reasoning) | Moonshot AI | 6.7 min | 249 of 870 planned attempts |
Frequently asked questions
- Which scores higher on the Geospatial Agent Index, Terminus-2 – GLM-4.7-Flash (Reasoning) or Terminus-2 – Kimi K2.7 Code (Reasoning)?
- Terminus-2 – Kimi K2.7 Code (Reasoning), at 73 against 43 for Terminus-2 – GLM-4.7-Flash (Reasoning). Terminus-2 – GLM-4.7-Flash (Reasoning): 143 of 870 planned attempts. Terminus-2 – Kimi K2.7 Code (Reasoning): 249 of 870 planned attempts. Coverage is partial; scores can change as more attempts are decided.
- Which is cheaper per task, Terminus-2 – GLM-4.7-Flash (Reasoning) or Terminus-2 – Kimi K2.7 Code (Reasoning)?
- Terminus-2 – GLM-4.7-Flash (Reasoning), at $0.025 against $0.126 for Terminus-2 – Kimi K2.7 Code (Reasoning).
- Which is faster per task, Terminus-2 – GLM-4.7-Flash (Reasoning) or Terminus-2 – Kimi K2.7 Code (Reasoning)?
- Terminus-2 – Kimi K2.7 Code (Reasoning), at 6.7 min against 9.5 min for Terminus-2 – GLM-4.7-Flash (Reasoning).
- Which has the larger context window, Terminus-2 – GLM-4.7-Flash (Reasoning) or Terminus-2 – Kimi K2.7 Code (Reasoning)?
- Terminus-2 – Kimi K2.7 Code (Reasoning), at 262,144 tokens against 131,072 tokens for Terminus-2 – GLM-4.7-Flash (Reasoning).
More: Terminus-2 – GLM-4.7-Flash (Reasoning) · Terminus-2 – Kimi K2.7 Code (Reasoning) · all comparisons