Axis Spatial

Terminus-2 – GLM-4.7-Flash (thinking on) vs. Kimi Code – Kimi K2.6 (always on): geospatial agent comparison

Comparison between Terminus-2 – GLM-4.7-Flash (thinking on) and Kimi Code – Kimi K2.6 (always on) 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 – GLM-4.7-Flash (thinking on) vs. Kimi Code – Kimi K2.6 (always on)
MetricTerminus-2 – GLM-4.7-Flash (thinking on)Kimi Code – Kimi K2.6 (always on)
Geospatial Agent Index29*56* (partial: attempt 1 on 72 of 320 tasks)
Earth-Bench V2 score2555
GeoBenchX score3257
GeoAgentBench score (guided GIS workflow; outside the index)38No data
GeoAnalystBench score (guided GIS workflow; outside the index)37No data
Raster and remote sensing score2660
Vector and overlay score500
Networks and routing scoreNo dataNo data
Climate and time series score260
Spatial statistics and interpolation score067
Mapping and cartography score3783
Recognising infeasible requests score3340
Cost per task$0.035$0.219
Time per task11.1 min9.7 min
Tokens per attempt484k840k
Turns per attempt18.8No data
Attempts decided32071
Input price per 1M tokens$0.06$0.95
Output price per 1M tokens$0.40$4.00
Context window131,072262,144
Image inputNoYes
DeveloperZ.aiMoonshot AI

Charts

Partial coverage. Kimi Code – Kimi K2.6 (always on): 11 of 147 Earth-Bench V2 tasks; 61 of 173 GeoBenchX tasks. Grey placeholders identify these entries in the index, cost and time charts; their height does not represent a value. Comparable bars appear when first-attempt coverage is complete. Their available results remain in the side-by-side table.

Geospatial Agent Index

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

  • Planned attempts still to come
Geospatial Agent IndexTerminus-2 – GLM-4.7-Flash (thinking on): 29* (partial coverage); Kimi Code – Kimi K2.6 (always on): Partial025507510029*GLM-4.7-Flash (thinking on)PartialKimi K2.6 (always on)
Data table: Geospatial Agent Index
Geospatial Agent Index
ModelCreatorGeospatial Agent IndexRange while attempts are pendingBenchmarks coveredCoverage (attempts)
Terminus-2 – GLM-4.7-Flash (thinking on)Z.ai29*No pending judgements; coverage incomplete2 of 2320 of 614 planned attempts

Cost per task

Average cost per task (USD) · Lower is better

  • Planned attempts still to come
Cost per taskTerminus-2 – GLM-4.7-Flash (thinking on): $0.035 (partial coverage); Kimi Code – Kimi K2.6 (always on): Partial$0$0.010$0.020$0.030$0.040$0.035GLM-4.7-Flash (thinking on)PartialKimi K2.6 (always on)
How to read this chart

Not shown: partial coverage. Kimi Code – Kimi K2.6 (always on).

Data table: Cost per task
Cost per task
ModelCreatorCost per taskCoverage (attempts)
Terminus-2 – GLM-4.7-Flash (thinking on)Z.ai$0.035320 of 614 planned attempts

Time per task

Average agent wall time per task · Lower is better

  • Planned attempts still to come
Time per taskTerminus-2 – GLM-4.7-Flash (thinking on): 11.1 min (partial coverage); Kimi Code – Kimi K2.6 (always on): Partial0m3m7m10m13m11.1 minGLM-4.7-Flash (thinking on)PartialKimi K2.6 (always on)
How to read this chart

Not shown: partial coverage. Kimi Code – Kimi K2.6 (always on).

Data table: Time per task
Time per task
ModelCreatorTime per taskCoverage (attempts)
Terminus-2 – GLM-4.7-Flash (thinking on)Z.ai11.1 min320 of 614 planned attempts

Frequently asked questions

Which scores higher on the Geospatial Agent Index, Terminus-2 – GLM-4.7-Flash (thinking on) or Kimi Code – Kimi K2.6 (always on)?
Not comparable yet: Kimi Code – Kimi K2.6 (always on) has partial coverage (11 of 147 Earth-Bench V2 tasks; 61 of 173 GeoBenchX tasks), so it is not ranked. Terminus-2 – GLM-4.7-Flash (thinking on): 320 of 614 planned attempts. Kimi Code – Kimi K2.6 (always on): 71 of 614 planned attempts. Coverage is partial; scores can change as more attempts are decided.
Which is cheaper per task, Terminus-2 – GLM-4.7-Flash (thinking on) or Kimi Code – Kimi K2.6 (always on)?
Terminus-2 – GLM-4.7-Flash (thinking on), at $0.035 against $0.219 for Kimi Code – Kimi K2.6 (always on).
Which is faster per task, Terminus-2 – GLM-4.7-Flash (thinking on) or Kimi Code – Kimi K2.6 (always on)?
Kimi Code – Kimi K2.6 (always on), at 9.7 min against 11.1 min for Terminus-2 – GLM-4.7-Flash (thinking on).
Which has the larger context window, Terminus-2 – GLM-4.7-Flash (thinking on) or Kimi Code – Kimi K2.6 (always on)?
Kimi Code – Kimi K2.6 (always on), at 262,144 tokens against 131,072 tokens for Terminus-2 – GLM-4.7-Flash (thinking on).

More: Terminus-2 – GLM-4.7-Flash (thinking on) · Kimi Code – Kimi K2.6 (always on) · all comparisons