Terminus-2 – GLM-5.2 (none) vs. Codex – GPT-5.6 Luna (medium): geospatial agent comparison

Comparison between Terminus-2 – GLM-5.2 (none) and Codex – GPT-5.6 Luna (medium) 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 (none) vs. Codex – GPT-5.6 Luna (medium)
Metric	Terminus-2 – GLM-5.2 (none)	Codex – GPT-5.6 Luna (medium)
Geospatial Agent Index	63*	66* (partial: attempt 1 on 339 of 488 tasks)
Earth-Bench V2 score	58	60
GeoBenchX score	60	58
GS-QA2 score	72	79
GeoAgentBench score (guided GIS workflow; outside the index)	92	98
GeoAnalystBench score (guided GIS workflow; outside the index)	74	100
Raster and remote sensing score	72	78
Vector and overlay score	65	76
Climate and time series score	58	58
Spatial statistics and interpolation score	31	0
Mapping and cartography score	79	83
Recognising infeasible requests score	45	41
Cost per task	$0.099	$0.0084
Time per task	2.5 min	2.1 min
Tokens per attempt	185k	125k
Turns per attempt	12.8	8.9
Attempts decided	488	339
Input price per 1M tokens	$1.40	$0.20
Output price per 1M tokens	$4.40	$1.20
Context window	262,144	No data
Image input	No	No data
Developer	Z.ai	OpenAI

Charts

Partial coverage. Codex – GPT-5.6 Luna (medium): 107 of 117 Earth-Bench V2 tasks; 43 of 150 GeoBenchX tasks; 189 of 221 GS-QA2 tasks. Grey placeholders identify these entries in the index, cost and output token 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

Attempts still to run

Data table: Geospatial Agent Index

Geospatial Agent Index
Model	Creator	Geospatial Agent Index	Range while attempts are pending	Benchmarks covered	Coverage (attempts)
Terminus-2 – GLM-5.2 (none)	Z.ai	63*	No pending judgements; coverage incomplete	3 of 3	488 of 722 scheduled attempts

Cost per task

Average cost per task (USD) · Lower is better

Attempts still to run

How to read this chart

Not shown: partial coverage. 1 entries without a first attempt on every index task. What is still running is on the models page.

Data table: Cost per task

Cost per task
Model	Creator	Cost per task	Coverage (attempts)
Terminus-2 – GLM-5.2 (none)	Z.ai	$0.099	488 of 722 scheduled attempts

Output tokens per task

Average output tokens per attempt, reasoning included · Lower is better

Attempts still to run

How to read this chart

Not shown: partial coverage. 1 entries without a first attempt on every index task. What is still running is on the models page.

Data table: Output tokens per task

Output tokens per task
Model	Creator	Output tokens per task	Coverage (attempts)
Terminus-2 – GLM-5.2 (none)	Z.ai	6k	488 of 722 scheduled attempts

Frequently asked questions

Which scores higher on the Geospatial Agent Index, Terminus-2 – GLM-5.2 (none) or Codex – GPT-5.6 Luna (medium)?

Not comparable yet: Codex – GPT-5.6 Luna (medium) has partial coverage (107 of 117 Earth-Bench V2 tasks; 43 of 150 GeoBenchX tasks; 189 of 221 GS-QA2 tasks), so it is not ranked. Terminus-2 – GLM-5.2 (none): 488 of 722 scheduled attempts. Codex – GPT-5.6 Luna (medium): 339 of 722 scheduled attempts. Coverage is partial; scores can change as more attempts are decided.

Which is cheaper per task, Terminus-2 – GLM-5.2 (none) or Codex – GPT-5.6 Luna (medium)?

Codex – GPT-5.6 Luna (medium), at $0.0084 against $0.099 for Terminus-2 – GLM-5.2 (none).

Which writes fewer output tokens per task, Terminus-2 – GLM-5.2 (none) or Codex – GPT-5.6 Luna (medium)?

Codex – GPT-5.6 Luna (medium), at 2k against 6k for Terminus-2 – GLM-5.2 (none).

Which has the larger context window, Terminus-2 – GLM-5.2 (none) or Codex – GPT-5.6 Luna (medium)?

Not known yet: Codex – GPT-5.6 Luna (medium) has no context window data.

More: Terminus-2 – GLM-5.2 (none) · Codex – GPT-5.6 Luna (medium) · all comparisons