Axis Spatial

Terminus-2 – Llama 3.3 70B (Non-reasoning) vs. Codex – GPT-5.6 Sol (high): geospatial agent comparison

Comparison between Terminus-2 – Llama 3.3 70B (Non-reasoning) and Codex – GPT-5.6 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 – Llama 3.3 70B (Non-reasoning) vs. Codex – GPT-5.6 Sol (high)
MetricTerminus-2 – Llama 3.3 70B (Non-reasoning)Codex – GPT-5.6 Sol (high)
Geospatial Agent Index8*79* (partial: attempt 1 on 360 of 488 tasks)
Earth-Bench V2 score976
GeoBenchX score672
GS-QA2 score1089
GeoAgentBench score (guided GIS workflow; outside the index)8100
GeoAnalystBench score (guided GIS workflow; outside the index)0100
Raster and remote sensing score783
Vector and overlay score1287
Climate and time series score1087
Spatial statistics and interpolation score050
Mapping and cartography score292
Recognising infeasible requests score1365
Cost per task$0.023$0.17
Time per task3.1 min2.0 min
Tokens per attempt62k141k
Turns per attempt14.48.4
Attempts decided488350
Input price per 1M tokens$0.29$4.00
Output price per 1M tokens$2.25$20.00
Context window24,000No data
Image inputNoNo data
DeveloperMetaOpenAI

Charts

Partial coverage. Codex – GPT-5.6 Sol (high): 93 of 117 Earth-Bench V2 tasks; 63 of 150 GeoBenchX tasks; 204 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
Geospatial Agent IndexTerminus-2 – Llama 3.3 70B (Non-reasoning): 8* (partial coverage); Codex – GPT-5.6 Sol (high): Partial02550751008*Llama 3.3 70B (Non-reasoning)PartialGPT-5.6 Sol (high)
Data table: Geospatial Agent Index
Geospatial Agent Index
ModelCreatorGeospatial Agent IndexRange while attempts are pendingBenchmarks coveredCoverage (attempts)
Terminus-2 – Llama 3.3 70B (Non-reasoning)Meta8*No pending judgements; coverage incomplete; 23 results awaiting review3 of 3488 of 722 scheduled attempts

Cost per task

Average cost per task (USD) · Lower is better

  • Attempts still to run
Cost per taskTerminus-2 – Llama 3.3 70B (Non-reasoning): $0.023 (partial coverage); Codex – GPT-5.6 Sol (high): Partial$0$0.01$0.02$0.03$0.04$0.023Llama 3.3 70B (Non-reasoning)PartialGPT-5.6 Sol (high)
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
ModelCreatorCost per taskCoverage (attempts)
Terminus-2 – Llama 3.3 70B (Non-reasoning)Meta$0.023488 of 722 scheduled attempts

Output tokens per task

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

  • Attempts still to run
Output tokens per taskTerminus-2 – Llama 3.3 70B (Non-reasoning): 2k (partial coverage); Codex – GPT-5.6 Sol (high): Partial01k2k3k4k2kLlama 3.3 70B (Non-reasoning)PartialGPT-5.6 Sol (high)
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
ModelCreatorOutput tokens per taskCoverage (attempts)
Terminus-2 – Llama 3.3 70B (Non-reasoning)Meta2k488 of 722 scheduled attempts

Frequently asked questions

Which scores higher on the Geospatial Agent Index, Terminus-2 – Llama 3.3 70B (Non-reasoning) or Codex – GPT-5.6 Sol (high)?
Not comparable yet: Codex – GPT-5.6 Sol (high) has partial coverage (93 of 117 Earth-Bench V2 tasks; 63 of 150 GeoBenchX tasks; 204 of 221 GS-QA2 tasks), so it is not ranked. Terminus-2 – Llama 3.3 70B (Non-reasoning): 488 of 722 scheduled attempts. Codex – GPT-5.6 Sol (high): 350 of 722 scheduled attempts. Coverage is partial; scores can change as more attempts are decided.
Which is cheaper per task, Terminus-2 – Llama 3.3 70B (Non-reasoning) or Codex – GPT-5.6 Sol (high)?
Terminus-2 – Llama 3.3 70B (Non-reasoning), at $0.023 against $0.17 for Codex – GPT-5.6 Sol (high).
Which writes fewer output tokens per task, Terminus-2 – Llama 3.3 70B (Non-reasoning) or Codex – GPT-5.6 Sol (high)?
Terminus-2 – Llama 3.3 70B (Non-reasoning), at 2k against 3k for Codex – GPT-5.6 Sol (high).
Which has the larger context window, Terminus-2 – Llama 3.3 70B (Non-reasoning) or Codex – GPT-5.6 Sol (high)?
Not known yet: Codex – GPT-5.6 Sol (high) has no context window data.

More: Terminus-2 – Llama 3.3 70B (Non-reasoning) · Codex – GPT-5.6 Sol (high) · all comparisons