Benchmark Almanac

KRIS-Bench

GPT-4o image editing [snapshot unspecified] 80.1 tops its leaderboard Step Image Edit 2 66.2 leads the models we track
Step Image Edit 2 66.2 leads since April 2026
Only in system cards

Image editing models follow 1,267 instructions that need factual, conceptual or procedural knowledge across 22 tasks. A GPT-4o judge scores the edits.

The judge rates visual consistency, visual quality, instruction following and knowledge plausibility. NeurIPS 2025 accepted the paper.

Released
May 2025
Kind
Image generation and editing
Level
School
Scored
Graded by a model
Answers
Open-ended
Tasks
All public
Last in a system card
May 2025
Last model added
April 2026
Scores refreshed
November 12th, 2026

In the authors’ words

Recent advances in multi-modal generative models have enabled significant progress in instruction-based image editing. However, while these models produce visually plausible outputs, their capacity for knowledge-based reasoning editing tasks remains under-explored. In this paper, we introduce KRIS-Bench (Knowledge-based Reasoning in Image-editing Systems Benchmark), a diagnostic benchmark designed to assess models through a cognitively informed lens. Drawing from educational theory, KRIS-Bench categorizes editing tasks across three foundational knowledge types: Factual, Conceptual, and Procedural. Based on this taxonomy, we design 22 representative tasks spanning 7 reasoning dimensions and release 1,267 high-quality annotated editing instances. To support fine-grained evaluation, we propose a comprehensive protocol that incorporates a novel Knowledge Plausibility metric, enhanced by knowledge hints and calibrated through human studies. Empirical results on 10 state-of-the-art models reveal significant gaps in reasoning performance, highlighting the need for knowledge-centric benchmarks to advance the development of intelligent image editing systems.

Abstract of KRIS-Bench: Benchmarking Next-Level Intelligent Image Editing Models (arXiv:2505.16707, CC0)
24
Entries on its own leaderboard, 9 models we track
1
System card reports it, from 1 lab

GPT-4o image editing [snapshot unspecified] tops the leaderboard with 80.1

Best score per entry from the benchmark's own leaderboard, read on November 12th, 2026. Where a model ran with several settings or harnesses, we keep its best. Names in gray aren't in our model list: fine-tunes, agent systems, products and older models. They don't count toward leaders. The best model we track is Step Image Edit 2, at 66.2.

Step Image Edit 2 leads with 66.2, claims included

Best score per model from every source, including labs’ own numbers and claims Epoch AI collected from reports and papers. Labs pick their own settings, so a claim can beat an independent run of the same model.

The newest model with a score here came out in April 2026, and nobody has tested a newer one. Among the 20 highest-ranked models on the capability index, these have no score yet:

  1. 1 GPT-4o image editing [snapshot unspecified] 80.1
  2. 2 Step Image Edit 2 66.2
  3. 3 JoyAI-Image-Edit 63.4
  4. 4 Gemini 2.0 62.4
  5. 5 Qwen-Image-Edit (2511) 62.0
  6. 6 Step 3o vision 61.4
  7. 7 Step1X-Edit v1.2 60.9
  8. 8 Doubao 60.7
  9. 9 BAGEL-Think 60.4
  10. 10 BAGEL 56.4
  11. 11 FLUX.1 Kontext [max] 55.1
  12. 12 FLUX.1 Kontext [pro] 54.2
  13. 13 Step1X-Edit v1.1 51.6
  14. 14 UniWorld-V1 50.3
  15. 15 OmniGen2 49.7
  16. 16 FLUX.1 Kontext [dev] 49.5
  17. 17 ByteMorph 44.9
  18. 18 HiDream-E1 44.7
  19. 19 Step1X-Edit 43.3
  20. 20 Emu2 39.7
  21. 21 AnyEdit 38.5
  22. 22 MagicBrush 37.1
  23. 23 OmniGen 28.9
  24. 24 InstructPix2Pix 22.8

Source: Official KRIS-Bench leaderboard

#EntryScoreSettingDateSource
1 GPT-4o image editing [snapshot unspecified] 80.1 Official leaderboard
2 Step Image Edit 2 66.2 Apr 2026 Official leaderboard
3 JoyAI-Image-Edit 63.4 Official leaderboard
4 Gemini 2.0 62.4 Official leaderboard
5 Qwen-Image-Edit (2511) 62.0 Official leaderboard
6 Step 3o vision 61.4 Official leaderboard
7 Step1X-Edit v1.2 60.9 Nov 2025 Official leaderboard
8 Doubao 60.7 Official leaderboard
9 BAGEL-Think 60.4 Official leaderboard
10 BAGEL 56.4 Official leaderboard
11 FLUX.1 Kontext [max] 55.1 Official leaderboard
12 FLUX.1 Kontext [pro] 54.2 Official leaderboard
13 Step1X-Edit v1.1 51.6 Jul 2025 Official leaderboard
14 UniWorld-V1 50.3 Official leaderboard
15 OmniGen2 49.7 Official leaderboard
16 FLUX.1 Kontext [dev] 49.5 Official leaderboard
17 ByteMorph 44.9 Official leaderboard
18 HiDream-E1 44.7 Official leaderboard
19 Step1X-Edit 43.3 Official leaderboard
20 Emu2 39.7 Official leaderboard
21 AnyEdit 38.5 Official leaderboard
22 MagicBrush 37.1 Official leaderboard
23 OmniGen 28.9 Official leaderboard
24 InstructPix2Pix 22.8 Official leaderboard
#ModelScoreSettingDateSource
1 Step Image Edit 2 66.2 Apr 2026 Official leaderboard
2 Qwen-Image-Edit (2511) 62.0 Official leaderboard
3 Step1X-Edit v1.2 60.9 Nov 2025 Official leaderboard
4 BAGEL-7B-MoT 60.2 May 2025 Lab model card
5 BAGEL 56.4 Official leaderboard
6 FLUX.1 Kontext [max] 55.1 Official leaderboard
7 FLUX.1 Kontext [pro] 54.2 Official leaderboard
8 Step1X-Edit v1.1 51.6 Jul 2025 Official leaderboard
9 FLUX.1 Kontext [dev] 49.5 Official leaderboard
10 Step1X-Edit 43.3 Official leaderboard

Labs report scores for 1 model in their cards. Switch the scores above to rank them together.

3 models have held number one on the official leaderboard since its release in May 2025 3 models have held number one with claims included since its release in May 2025

Lab claims count from the day the card came out, independent runs from the model’s release.

StepFun
Own leaderboard Not tested since Apr 2026
Step Image Edit 2 66.2

Source: Official KRIS-Bench leaderboard

Scores over time

All the scores we have, one dot each, so a model tested at several settings appears more than once.

On the benchmark’s own leaderboard Reported by the lab in its model card
50.0 55.0 60.0 65.0 70.0 2025 2026 50.0 55.0 60.0 65.0 70.0 2025 2026

Sources: Official KRIS-Bench leaderboard and labs’ model cards

Labs report it only in system cards

We read the headline results of 522 launch posts from 52 labs, and none of them list this benchmark. Some system cards do, below.

One system card reports it

Besides launch posts, we read the system cards, model cards and technical reports labs publish with a release. They report far more, including safety and frontier-risk tests.

DateDocumentScoreAs the document writes itSection
May 20, 2025 BAGEL-7B-MoT technical report 60.2 KRIS-Bench Overall, BAGEL w/ Self-CoT, evaluated by GPT-4o (Table 10). Without CoT 56.21 Capabilities

More in Vision

All 281 in Vision
  • MMMU In use 11.5K college-level multimodal questions across 30 subjects. Multiple-choice and open accuracy. GPT-5.1 85.4%
  • MMMU-Pro In use Harder MMMU: college-level multimodal questions with more options and vision-only inputs to remove text shortcuts. GPT-5.6 Sol 84.6%
  • CharXiv In use Chart understanding on real arXiv figures. Reasoning questions require synthesizing information from complex charts. Claude Fable 5 93.5%
  • MATH-Vision (MathVision) In use 3,040 competition math problems with visual context. Answer accuracy. Qwen 3.8 Max 97.7%
  • MMStar In use Models answer 1,500 human-curated image questions that cannot be solved without the image, across 6 core capabilities. Scored by accuracy. Qwen 3.8 Max 85.9%
  • ChartQA In use Models answer human-written and generated questions about chart images that need visual and arithmetic reasoning. Scored by relaxed accuracy with a 5 percent numeric tolerance. Command A Vision 90.9%