Terminus-2 – Kimi K3 (always on) vs. Claude Code – Claude Opus 5.5 (xhigh): geospatial agent comparison
Comparison between Terminus-2 – Kimi K3 (always on) and Claude Code – Claude Opus 5.5 (xhigh) on the Geospatial Agent Index, each benchmark, cost, time and token use, from the same tasks, agent and limits. Methodology.
Side by side
| Metric | Terminus-2 – Kimi K3 (always on) | Claude Code – Claude Opus 5.5 (xhigh) |
|---|---|---|
| Geospatial Agent Index | 58* | 69* |
| Earth-Bench V2 score | 61 | 66 |
| GeoBenchX score | 55 | 72 |
| GeoAgentBench score (guided GIS workflow; outside the index) | 94 | 98 |
| GeoAnalystBench score (guided GIS workflow; outside the index) | 89 | 100 |
| Raster and remote sensing score | 59 | 69 |
| Vector and overlay score | 33 | 67 |
| Networks and routing score | No data | No data |
| Climate and time series score | 66 | 66 |
| Spatial statistics and interpolation score | 50 | 57 |
| Mapping and cartography score | 78 | 85 |
| Recognising infeasible requests score | 38 | 62 |
| Cost per task | $0.336 | $0.411 |
| Time per task | 3.9 min | 2.4 min |
| Tokens per attempt | 76k | 274k |
| Turns per attempt | 7.7 | 8.9 |
| Attempts decided | 320 | 320 |
| Input price per 1M tokens | $3.00 | $4.00 |
| Output price per 1M tokens | $15.00 | $20.00 |
| Context window | 1,000,000 | No data |
| Image input | Yes | No data |
| Developer | Moonshot AI | Anthropic |
Charts
Geospatial Agent Index
Equal-weight average of the evaluation scores, 0 to 100 · Higher is better
First eight selected entries in metric order. Full results in table view.
Data table: Geospatial Agent Index
| Model | Creator | Geospatial Agent Index | Range while attempts are pending | Benchmarks covered | Coverage (attempts) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Code – Claude Opus 5.5 (xhigh) | Anthropic | 69* | No pending judgements; coverage incomplete | 2 of 2 | 320 of 614 planned attempts |
| Terminus-2 – Kimi K3 (always on) | Moonshot AI | 58* | No pending judgements; coverage incomplete; 1 trace review declined by the judge | 2 of 2 | 320 of 614 planned attempts |
Cost per task
Average cost per task (USD) · Lower is better
First eight selected entries in metric order. Full results in table view.
Data table: Cost per task
| Model | Creator | Cost per task | Coverage (attempts) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Terminus-2 – Kimi K3 (always on) | Moonshot AI | $0.336 | 320 of 614 planned attempts |
| Claude Code – Claude Opus 5.5 (xhigh) | Anthropic | $0.411 | 320 of 614 planned attempts |
Time per task
Average agent wall time per task · Lower is better
First eight selected entries in metric order. Full results in table view.
Data table: Time per task
| Model | Creator | Time per task | Coverage (attempts) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Terminus-2 – Kimi K3 (always on) | Moonshot AI | 3.9 min | 320 of 614 planned attempts |
| Claude Code – Claude Opus 5.5 (xhigh) | Anthropic | 2.4 min | 320 of 614 planned attempts |
Frequently asked questions
Which scores higher on the Geospatial Agent Index, Terminus-2 – Kimi K3 (always on) or Claude Code – Claude Opus 5.5 (xhigh)?
Claude Code – Claude Opus 5.5 (xhigh), at 69 against 58 for Terminus-2 – Kimi K3 (always on). Terminus-2 – Kimi K3 (always on): 320 of 614 planned attempts. Claude Code – Claude Opus 5.5 (xhigh): 320 of 614 planned attempts. Coverage is partial; scores can change as more attempts are decided.
Which is cheaper per task, Terminus-2 – Kimi K3 (always on) or Claude Code – Claude Opus 5.5 (xhigh)?
Terminus-2 – Kimi K3 (always on), at $0.336 against $0.411 for Claude Code – Claude Opus 5.5 (xhigh).
Which is faster per task, Terminus-2 – Kimi K3 (always on) or Claude Code – Claude Opus 5.5 (xhigh)?
Claude Code – Claude Opus 5.5 (xhigh), at 2.4 min against 3.9 min for Terminus-2 – Kimi K3 (always on).
Which has the larger context window, Terminus-2 – Kimi K3 (always on) or Claude Code – Claude Opus 5.5 (xhigh)?
Not known yet: Claude Code – Claude Opus 5.5 (xhigh) has no context window data.
More: Terminus-2 – Kimi K3 (always on) · Claude Code – Claude Opus 5.5 (xhigh) · all comparisons