MMVP
Models answer 300 questions about 150 image pairs that CLIP embeds as near duplicates. A pair counts only when both answers are right.
Introduced in the paper Eyes Wide Shut on visual shortcomings of multimodal LLMs.
- Made by
- New York University and UC Berkeley (Tong et al.)
- Released
- January 2024
- Kind
- Spatial reasoning and counting
- Level
- Everyday
- Scored
- Checked automatically
- Answers
- Multiple choice
- Tasks
- All public
- Strongest model tested
- Kimi K2.5 #75 on the capability index
- Last in a launch post
- December 2025, dropped after it saturated
- Last model added
- March 2026
- Scores refreshed
- November 12th, 2026
In the authors’ words
Is vision good enough for language? Recent advancements in multimodal models primarily stem from the powerful reasoning abilities of large language models (LLMs). However, the visual component typically depends only on the instance-level contrastive language-image pre-training (CLIP). Our research reveals that the visual capabilities in recent multimodal LLMs (MLLMs) still exhibit systematic shortcomings. To understand the roots of these errors, we explore the gap between the visual embedding space of CLIP and vision-only self-supervised learning. We identify ”CLIP-blind pairs” - images that CLIP perceives as similar despite their clear visual differences. With these pairs, we construct the Multimodal Visual Patterns (MMVP) benchmark. MMVP exposes areas where state-of-the-art systems, including GPT-4V, struggle with straightforward questions across nine basic visual patterns, often providing incorrect answers and hallucinated explanations. We further evaluate various CLIP-based vision-and-language models and found a notable correlation between visual patterns that challenge CLIP models and those problematic for multimodal LLMs. As an initial effort to address these issues, we propose a Mixture of Features (MoF) approach, demonstrating that integrating vision self-supervised learning features with MLLMs can significantly enhance their visual grounding capabilities. Together, our research suggests visual representation learning remains an open challenge, and accurate visual grounding is crucial for future successful multimodal systems.
Kimi K2.5 leads with 87% among models released by January 2026
Best score per model as labs report them in their own cards. Labs pick their own settings, so these compare less cleanly than independent runs.
GPT-4V leads with 38.7% across all independent runs
Best score per model across the official leaderboard, Epoch AI’s own runs and any board Epoch AI copied. Each bar and row names its source.
Kimi K2.5 leads with 87%, 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 January 2026, and nobody has reported a newer one. Among the 20 highest-ranked models on the capability index, these have no score yet:
- Claude Fable 5.2
-
Gemini 4 Carbon
- GPT-6 Astra
- Claude Opus 5.5
- and 16 more
- 1 Kimi K2.5 87%
- 2
Seed1.8 86%
- 3
Seed1.5-VL 69.3%
- 4
BAGEL-7B-MoT 69.3%
- 5
STEP3-VL-10B 68.2%
Source: Labs’ model cards
- 1 GPT-4V 38.7%
Source: Official MMVP leaderboard
- 1 Kimi K2.5 87%
- 2
Seed1.8 86%
- 3
Seed1.5-VL 69.3%
- 4
BAGEL-7B-MoT 69.3%
- 5
STEP3-VL-10B 68.2%
- 6 GPT-4V 38.7%
Sources: Labs’ model cards and official MMVP leaderboard
| # | Model | Score | Setting | Date | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Kimi K2.5 | 87% | Jan 2026 | Lab model card | |
| 2 | | 86% | Dec 2025 | Lab model card | |
| 3 | | 69.3% | May 2025 | Lab model card | |
| 4 | | 69.3% | May 2025 | Lab model card | |
| 5 | | 68.2% | Jan 2026 | Lab model card |
| # | Model | Score | Setting | Date | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | GPT-4V | 38.7% | Nov 2023 | Official leaderboard |
| # | Model | Score | Setting | Date | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Kimi K2.5 | 87% | Jan 2026 | Lab model card | |
| 2 | | 86% | Dec 2025 | Lab model card | |
| 3 | | 69.3% | May 2025 | Lab model card | |
| 4 | | 69.3% | May 2025 | Lab model card | |
| 5 | | 68.2% | Jan 2026 | Lab model card | |
| 6 | GPT-4V | 38.7% | Nov 2023 | Official leaderboard |
The benchmark's own leaderboard has 8 entries, 1 of them models we track. Switch the scores above to rank them together.
3 models have held number one in labs’ own numbers since its release in January 2024 Number one over time 4 models have held number one with claims included since its release in January 2024
Lab claims count from the day the card came out, independent runs from the model’s release.
Source: Labs’ model cards
ByteDance Seed’s own number for Seed1.8 passed 85% in December 2025
All the scores we have, one dot each, so a model tested at several settings appears more than once.
Sources: Official MMVP leaderboard and labs’ model cards
Labs headline it less often now, last in December 2025
Launch posts from every lab that has listed it, one tick per post. Tall colored ticks include it, and short gray ones leave it out.
| Date | Launch post | Score | As the post writes it |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 18, 2025 | 86 | MMVP | |
| May 12, 2025 | 69.3 | MMVP |
5 system cards report it, from 3 labs
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.
| Date | Document | Score | As the document writes it | Section |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 21, 2026 | | 86 | MMVP (Table 2) | Capabilities |
| Jan 30, 2026 | Kimi K2.5 technical report | 87 | MMVP (Table 4) | Capabilities |
| Jan 14, 2026 | | 68.2 | MMVP, SeRe (Tables 1 and 3). PaCoRe 68.00 | Capabilities |
| May 20, 2025 | | 69.3 | MMVP (Table 4) | Capabilities |
| May 11, 2025 | | 69.3 | MMVP, thinking (Table 6). Non-thinking 70.7 | Capabilities |
More 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%