  We compare five general circulation models (GCMs) which have been recently
used to study hot extrasolar planet atmospheres (BOB, CAM, IGCM, MITgcm, and
PEQMOD), under three test cases useful for assessing model convergence and
accuracy. Such a broad, detailed intercomparison has not been performed thus
far for extrasolar planets study. The models considered all solve the
traditional primitive equations, but employ different numerical algorithms or
grids (e.g., pseudospectral and finite volume, with the latter separately in
longitude-latitude and `cubed-sphere' grids). The test cases are chosen to
cleanly address specific aspects of the behaviors typically reported in hot
extrasolar planet simulations: 1) steady-state, 2) nonlinearly evolving
baroclinic wave, and 3) response to fast timescale thermal relaxation. When
initialized with a steady jet, all models maintain the steadiness, as they
should -- except MITgcm in cubed-sphere grid. A very good agreement is obtained
for a baroclinic wave evolving from an initial instability in pseudospectral
models (only). However, exact numerical convergence is still not achieved
across the pseudospectral models: amplitudes and phases are observably
different. When subject to a typical `hot-Jupiter'-like forcing, all five
models show quantitatively different behavior -- although qualitatively
similar, time-variable, quadrupole-dominated flows are produced. Hence, as have
been advocated in several past studies, specific quantitative predictions (such
as the location of large vortices and hot regions) by GCMs should be viewed
with caution. Overall, in the tests considered here, pseudospectral models in
pressure coordinate (PEBOB and PEQMOD) perform the best and MITgcm in
cubed-sphere grid performs the worst.
