Axis Spatial

Terminus-2 – GLM-5.2 (high) vs. Terminus-2 – Mistral Small 3.1 24B (Non-reasoning): geospatial agent comparison

Comparison between Terminus-2 – GLM-5.2 (high) and Terminus-2 – Mistral Small 3.1 24B (Non-reasoning) 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-5.2 (high) vs. Terminus-2 – Mistral Small 3.1 24B (Non-reasoning)
MetricTerminus-2 – GLM-5.2 (high)Terminus-2 – Mistral Small 3.1 24B (Non-reasoning)
Geospatial Agent Index72* (attempts per task: 1.1)0* (attempts per task: 1 on 9 of 290 tasks so far)
GeoAgentBench score97No data
GeoBenchX score55No data
Earth-Bench score380
GeoAnalystBench score100No data
Raster and remote sensing score690
Vector and overlay score83No data
Networks and routing score100No data
Climate and time series score620
Spatial statistics and interpolation score65No data
Mapping and cartography score72No data
Recognising infeasible requests score41No data
Cost per task$0.231$0.247
Time per task5.9 min15.6 min
Tokens per attempt318k693k
Turns per attempt11.925.7
Attempts decided3109
Input price per 1M tokens$1.40$0.35
Output price per 1M tokens$4.40$0.56
Context window262,144128,000
Image inputNoYes
DeveloperZ.aiMistral AI

Charts

Geospatial Agent Index

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

  • Partial coverage
Geospatial Agent IndexTerminus-2 – GLM-5.2 (high): 72* (partial coverage); Terminus-2 – Mistral Small 3.1 24B (Non-reasoning): 0* (partial coverage)025507510072*GLM-5.2 (high)0*Mistral Small 3.1 24B (Non-reasoning)
Data table: Geospatial Agent Index
Geospatial Agent Index
ModelCreatorGeospatial Agent IndexRange while attempts are pendingBenchmarks coveredCoverage (attempts)
Terminus-2 – GLM-5.2 (high)Z.ai72* (attempts per task: 1.1)71 to 724 of 4310 of 870 planned attempts (1 excluded)
Terminus-2 – Mistral Small 3.1 24B (Non-reasoning)Mistral AI0* (attempts per task: 1 on 9 of 290 tasks so far)No pending judgements; coverage incomplete1 of 49 of 351 planned attempts

Cost per task

Average cost per task (USD) · Lower is better

  • Partial coverage
Cost per taskTerminus-2 – GLM-5.2 (high): $0.231 (partial coverage); Terminus-2 – Mistral Small 3.1 24B (Non-reasoning): $0.247 (partial coverage)$0$0.062$0.125$0.188$0.250$0.231GLM-5.2 (high)$0.247Mistral Small 3.1 24B (Non-reasoning)
Data table: Cost per task
Cost per task
ModelCreatorCost per taskCoverage (attempts)
Terminus-2 – GLM-5.2 (high)Z.ai$0.231320 of 870 planned attempts (1 excluded)
Terminus-2 – Mistral Small 3.1 24B (Non-reasoning)Mistral AI$0.2479 of 351 planned attempts

Time per task

Average agent wall time per task · Lower is better

  • Partial coverage
Time per taskTerminus-2 – GLM-5.2 (high): 5.9 min (partial coverage); Terminus-2 – Mistral Small 3.1 24B (Non-reasoning): 15.6 min (partial coverage)0m4m8m12m17m5.9 minGLM-5.2 (high)15.6 minMistral Small 3.1 24B (Non-reasoning)
Data table: Time per task
Time per task
ModelCreatorTime per taskCoverage (attempts)
Terminus-2 – GLM-5.2 (high)Z.ai5.9 min320 of 870 planned attempts (1 excluded)
Terminus-2 – Mistral Small 3.1 24B (Non-reasoning)Mistral AI15.6 min9 of 351 planned attempts

Frequently asked questions

Which scores higher on the Geospatial Agent Index, Terminus-2 – GLM-5.2 (high) or Terminus-2 – Mistral Small 3.1 24B (Non-reasoning)?
Not comparable yet: Terminus-2 – Mistral Small 3.1 24B (Non-reasoning) has scores on 1 of 4 benchmarks, so it is not yet ranked. Terminus-2 – GLM-5.2 (high): 310 of 870 planned attempts (1 excluded). Terminus-2 – Mistral Small 3.1 24B (Non-reasoning): 9 of 351 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 – Mistral Small 3.1 24B (Non-reasoning)?
Terminus-2 – GLM-5.2 (high), at $0.231 against $0.247 for Terminus-2 – Mistral Small 3.1 24B (Non-reasoning).
Which is faster per task, Terminus-2 – GLM-5.2 (high) or Terminus-2 – Mistral Small 3.1 24B (Non-reasoning)?
Terminus-2 – GLM-5.2 (high), at 5.9 min against 15.6 min for Terminus-2 – Mistral Small 3.1 24B (Non-reasoning).
Which has the larger context window, Terminus-2 – GLM-5.2 (high) or Terminus-2 – Mistral Small 3.1 24B (Non-reasoning)?
Terminus-2 – GLM-5.2 (high), at 262,144 tokens against 128,000 tokens for Terminus-2 – Mistral Small 3.1 24B (Non-reasoning).

More: Terminus-2 – GLM-5.2 (high) · Terminus-2 – Mistral Small 3.1 24B (Non-reasoning) · all comparisons