Terminus-2 – GLM-5.2 (high) vs. Terminus-2 – Kimi K3 (always on): geospatial agent comparison
Comparison between Terminus-2 – GLM-5.2 (high) and Terminus-2 – Kimi K3 (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
| Metric | Terminus-2 – GLM-5.2 (high) | Terminus-2 – Kimi K3 (always on) |
|---|---|---|
| Geospatial Agent Index | 56* | 58* |
| Earth-Bench V2 score | 54 | 61 |
| GeoBenchX score | 58 | 55 |
| GeoAgentBench score (guided GIS workflow; outside the index) | 94 | 94 |
| GeoAnalystBench score (guided GIS workflow; outside the index) | 100 | 89 |
| Raster and remote sensing score | 54 | 59 |
| Vector and overlay score | 50 | 33 |
| Networks and routing score | No data | No data |
| Climate and time series score | 62 | 66 |
| Spatial statistics and interpolation score | 43 | 50 |
| Mapping and cartography score | 78 | 78 |
| Recognising infeasible requests score | 41 | 38 |
| Cost per task | $0.319 | $0.336 |
| Time per task | 8.3 min | 3.9 min |
| Tokens per attempt | 512k | 76k |
| Turns per attempt | 14.9 | 7.7 |
| Attempts decided | 320 | 320 |
| Input price per 1M tokens | $1.40 | $3.00 |
| Output price per 1M tokens | $4.40 | $15.00 |
| Context window | 262,144 | 1,000,000 |
| Image input | No | Yes |
| Developer | Z.ai | Moonshot 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 – Kimi K3 (always on) | Moonshot AI | 58* | No pending judgements; coverage incomplete; 1 trace review declined by the judge | 2 of 2 | 320 of 614 planned attempts |
| Terminus-2 – GLM-5.2 (high) | Z.ai | 56* | No pending judgements; coverage incomplete; 1 trace review declined by the judge | 2 of 2 | 320 of 614 planned attempts |
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 – GLM-5.2 (high) | Z.ai | $0.319 | 320 of 614 planned attempts |
| Terminus-2 – Kimi K3 (always on) | Moonshot AI | $0.336 | 320 of 614 planned attempts |
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 – GLM-5.2 (high) | Z.ai | 8.3 min | 320 of 614 planned attempts |
| Terminus-2 – Kimi K3 (always on) | Moonshot AI | 3.9 min | 320 of 614 planned attempts |
Frequently asked questions
Which scores higher on the Geospatial Agent Index, Terminus-2 – GLM-5.2 (high) or Terminus-2 – Kimi K3 (always on)?
Terminus-2 – Kimi K3 (always on), at 58 against 56 for Terminus-2 – GLM-5.2 (high). Terminus-2 – GLM-5.2 (high): 320 of 614 planned attempts. Terminus-2 – Kimi K3 (always on): 320 of 614 planned attempts. Coverage is partial; scores can change as more attempts are decided.
Which is cheaper per task, Terminus-2 – GLM-5.2 (high) or Terminus-2 – Kimi K3 (always on)?
Terminus-2 – GLM-5.2 (high), at $0.319 against $0.336 for Terminus-2 – Kimi K3 (always on).
Which is faster per task, Terminus-2 – GLM-5.2 (high) or Terminus-2 – Kimi K3 (always on)?
Terminus-2 – Kimi K3 (always on), at 3.9 min against 8.3 min for Terminus-2 – GLM-5.2 (high).
Which has the larger context window, Terminus-2 – GLM-5.2 (high) or Terminus-2 – Kimi K3 (always on)?
Terminus-2 – Kimi K3 (always on), at 1,000,000 tokens against 262,144 tokens for Terminus-2 – GLM-5.2 (high).
More: Terminus-2 – GLM-5.2 (high) · Terminus-2 – Kimi K3 (always on) · all comparisons