Axis Spatial

Terminus-2 – gpt-oss-120b (high) vs. Claude Code – Claude Haiku 5.5 (high): geospatial agent comparison

Comparison between Terminus-2 – gpt-oss-120b (high) and Claude Code – Claude Haiku 5.5 (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 – gpt-oss-120b (high) vs. Claude Code – Claude Haiku 5.5 (high)
MetricTerminus-2 – gpt-oss-120b (high)Claude Code – Claude Haiku 5.5 (high)
Geospatial Agent Index5275* (partial: 1.7 of 3 attempts)
GeoAgentBench score7598
GeoBenchX score3861
Earth-Bench score4451
GeoAnalystBench score5189
Raster and remote sensing score5469
Vector and overlay score6175
Networks and routing score80100
Climate and time series score5779
Spatial statistics and interpolation score3258
Mapping and cartography score3475
Recognising infeasible requests score4456
Cost per task$0.026$0.010
Time per task4.6 min1.1 min
Tokens per attempt60k328k
Turns per attempt5.28.1
Attempts decided870422
Input price per 1M tokens$0.35$0.10
Output price per 1M tokens$0.75$0.50
Context window128,000No data
Image inputNoNo data
DeveloperOpenAIAnthropic

Charts

Geospatial Agent Index

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

  • Partial coverage
Geospatial Agent IndexClaude Code – Claude Haiku 5.5 (high): 75* (partial coverage); Terminus-2 – gpt-oss-120b (high): 52025507510075*Claude Haiku 5.5 (high)52gpt-oss-120b (high)
Data table: Geospatial Agent Index
Geospatial Agent Index
ModelCreatorGeospatial Agent IndexRange while attempts are pendingBenchmarks coveredCoverage (attempts)
Claude Code – Claude Haiku 5.5 (high)Anthropic75* (partial: 1.7 of 3 attempts)66 to 774 of 4422 of 870 planned attempts
Terminus-2 – gpt-oss-120b (high)OpenAI52No pending judgements4 of 4870 of 870 planned attempts

Cost per task

Average cost per task (USD) · Lower is better

  • Partial coverage
Cost per taskClaude Code – Claude Haiku 5.5 (high): $0.010 (partial coverage); Terminus-2 – gpt-oss-120b (high): $0.026 (partial coverage)$0$0.0075$0.015$0.022$0.030$0.010Claude Haiku 5.5 (high)$0.026gpt-oss-120b (high)
Data table: Cost per task
Cost per task
ModelCreatorCost per taskCoverage (attempts)
Terminus-2 – gpt-oss-120b (high)OpenAI$0.026869 of 870 planned attempts
Claude Code – Claude Haiku 5.5 (high)Anthropic$0.010485 of 870 planned attempts

Time per task

Average agent wall time per task · Lower is better

  • Partial coverage
Time per taskClaude Code – Claude Haiku 5.5 (high): 1.1 min (partial coverage); Terminus-2 – gpt-oss-120b (high): 4.6 min0m1m2m4m5m1.1 minClaude Haiku 5.5 (high)4.6 mingpt-oss-120b (high)
Data table: Time per task
Time per task
ModelCreatorTime per taskCoverage (attempts)
Terminus-2 – gpt-oss-120b (high)OpenAI4.6 min870 of 870 planned attempts
Claude Code – Claude Haiku 5.5 (high)Anthropic1.1 min485 of 870 planned attempts

Frequently asked questions

Which scores higher on the Geospatial Agent Index, Terminus-2 – gpt-oss-120b (high) or Claude Code – Claude Haiku 5.5 (high)?
Claude Code – Claude Haiku 5.5 (high), at 75 against 52 for Terminus-2 – gpt-oss-120b (high). Terminus-2 – gpt-oss-120b (high): 870 of 870 planned attempts. Claude Code – Claude Haiku 5.5 (high): 422 of 870 planned attempts. Coverage is partial; scores can change as more attempts are decided.
Which is cheaper per task, Terminus-2 – gpt-oss-120b (high) or Claude Code – Claude Haiku 5.5 (high)?
Claude Code – Claude Haiku 5.5 (high), at $0.010 against $0.026 for Terminus-2 – gpt-oss-120b (high).
Which is faster per task, Terminus-2 – gpt-oss-120b (high) or Claude Code – Claude Haiku 5.5 (high)?
Claude Code – Claude Haiku 5.5 (high), at 1.1 min against 4.6 min for Terminus-2 – gpt-oss-120b (high).
Which has the larger context window, Terminus-2 – gpt-oss-120b (high) or Claude Code – Claude Haiku 5.5 (high)?
Not known yet: Claude Code – Claude Haiku 5.5 (high) has no context window data.

More: Terminus-2 – gpt-oss-120b (high) · Claude Code – Claude Haiku 5.5 (high) · all comparisons