Axis Spatial

Terminus-2 – GLM-5.2 (none) vs. Codex – GPT-6.1 Sol (medium): geospatial agent comparison

Comparison between Terminus-2 – GLM-5.2 (none) and Codex – GPT-6.1 Sol (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-6.1 Sol (medium)
MetricTerminus-2 – GLM-5.2 (none)Codex – GPT-6.1 Sol (medium)
Geospatial Agent Index69* (partial: 1.4 of 3 attempts)79* (partial: 2.6 of 3 attempts)
GeoAgentBench score94100
GeoBenchX score5167
Earth-Bench score5151
GeoAnalystBench score79100
Raster and remote sensing score7371
Vector and overlay score6982
Networks and routing score100100
Climate and time series score5875
Spatial statistics and interpolation score5862
Mapping and cartography score7575
Recognising infeasible requests score3369
Cost per task$0.103$0.060
Time per task2.9 min1.4 min
Tokens per attempt169k111k
Turns per attempt11.36.6
Attempts decided356749
Input price per 1M tokens$1.40$2.00
Output price per 1M tokens$4.40$10.00
Context window262,144No data
Image inputNoNo data
DeveloperZ.aiOpenAI

Charts

Geospatial Agent Index

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

  • Partial coverage
Geospatial Agent IndexCodex – GPT-6.1 Sol (medium): 79* (partial coverage); Terminus-2 – GLM-5.2 (none): 69* (partial coverage)025507510079*GPT-6.1 Sol (medium)69*GLM-5.2 (none)
Data table: Geospatial Agent Index
Geospatial Agent Index
ModelCreatorGeospatial Agent IndexRange while attempts are pendingBenchmarks coveredCoverage (attempts)
Codex – GPT-6.1 Sol (medium)OpenAI79* (partial: 2.6 of 3 attempts)No pending judgements; coverage incomplete4 of 4749 of 870 planned attempts (6 excluded)
Terminus-2 – GLM-5.2 (none)Z.ai69* (partial: 1.4 of 3 attempts)62 to 724 of 4356 of 870 planned attempts

Cost per task

Average cost per task (USD) · Lower is better

  • Partial coverage
Cost per taskCodex – GPT-6.1 Sol (medium): $0.060 (partial coverage); Terminus-2 – GLM-5.2 (none): $0.103 (partial coverage)$0$0.030$0.060$0.090$0.120$0.060GPT-6.1 Sol (medium)$0.103GLM-5.2 (none)
Data table: Cost per task
Cost per task
ModelCreatorCost per taskCoverage (attempts)
Terminus-2 – GLM-5.2 (none)Z.ai$0.103408 of 870 planned attempts
Codex – GPT-6.1 Sol (medium)OpenAI$0.060749 of 870 planned attempts (6 excluded)

Time per task

Average agent wall time per task · Lower is better

  • Partial coverage
Time per taskCodex – GPT-6.1 Sol (medium): 1.4 min (partial coverage); Terminus-2 – GLM-5.2 (none): 2.9 min (partial coverage)0m1m2m2m3m1.4 minGPT-6.1 Sol (medium)2.9 minGLM-5.2 (none)
Data table: Time per task
Time per task
ModelCreatorTime per taskCoverage (attempts)
Terminus-2 – GLM-5.2 (none)Z.ai2.9 min408 of 870 planned attempts
Codex – GPT-6.1 Sol (medium)OpenAI1.4 min749 of 870 planned attempts (6 excluded)

Frequently asked questions

Which scores higher on the Geospatial Agent Index, Terminus-2 – GLM-5.2 (none) or Codex – GPT-6.1 Sol (medium)?
Codex – GPT-6.1 Sol (medium), at 79 against 69 for Terminus-2 – GLM-5.2 (none). Terminus-2 – GLM-5.2 (none): 356 of 870 planned attempts. Codex – GPT-6.1 Sol (medium): 749 of 870 planned attempts (6 excluded). 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-6.1 Sol (medium)?
Codex – GPT-6.1 Sol (medium), at $0.060 against $0.103 for Terminus-2 – GLM-5.2 (none).
Which is faster per task, Terminus-2 – GLM-5.2 (none) or Codex – GPT-6.1 Sol (medium)?
Codex – GPT-6.1 Sol (medium), at 1.4 min against 2.9 min for Terminus-2 – GLM-5.2 (none).
Which has the larger context window, Terminus-2 – GLM-5.2 (none) or Codex – GPT-6.1 Sol (medium)?
Not known yet: Codex – GPT-6.1 Sol (medium) has no context window data.

More: Terminus-2 – GLM-5.2 (none) · Codex – GPT-6.1 Sol (medium) · all comparisons