Terminus-2 – GLM-5.2 (none) vs. Codex – GPT-6 Sol (high): geospatial agent comparison

Comparison between Terminus-2 – GLM-5.2 (none) and Codex – GPT-6 Sol (high) 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 Sol (high)
Metric	Terminus-2 – GLM-5.2 (none)	Codex – GPT-6 Sol (high)
Geospatial Agent Index	63*	80* (partial: attempt 1 on 475 of 488 tasks)
Earth-Bench V2 score	58	76
GeoBenchX score	60	75
GS-QA2 score	72	89
GeoAgentBench score (guided GIS workflow; outside the index)	92	100
GeoAnalystBench score (guided GIS workflow; outside the index)	74	100
Raster and remote sensing score	72	84
Vector and overlay score	65	86
Climate and time series score	58	80
Spatial statistics and interpolation score	31	33
Mapping and cartography score	79	85
Recognising infeasible requests score	45	79
Cost per task	$0.099	$0.080
Time per task	2.5 min	1.7 min
Tokens per attempt	185k	144k
Turns per attempt	12.8	8.6
Attempts decided	488	460
Input price per 1M tokens	$1.40	$2.00
Output price per 1M tokens	$4.40	$10.00
Context window	262,144	No data
Image input	No	No data
Developer	Z.ai	OpenAI

Charts

Partial coverage. Codex – GPT-6 Sol (high): 116 of 117 Earth-Bench V2 tasks; 138 of 150 GeoBenchX 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-6 Sol (high)?

Not comparable yet: Codex – GPT-6 Sol (high) has partial coverage (116 of 117 Earth-Bench V2 tasks; 138 of 150 GeoBenchX tasks), so it is not ranked. Terminus-2 – GLM-5.2 (none): 488 of 722 scheduled attempts. Codex – GPT-6 Sol (high): 460 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-6 Sol (high)?

Codex – GPT-6 Sol (high), at $0.080 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-6 Sol (high)?

Codex – GPT-6 Sol (high), at 3k against 6k for Terminus-2 – GLM-5.2 (none).

Which has the larger context window, Terminus-2 – GLM-5.2 (none) or Codex – GPT-6 Sol (high)?

Not known yet: Codex – GPT-6 Sol (high) has no context window data.

More: Terminus-2 – GLM-5.2 (none) · Codex – GPT-6 Sol (high) · all comparisons