Q-Bench Image-Pair Perception
Models answer multiple-choice questions comparing low-level attributes across image pairs. The score is overall answer accuracy in the A1-Pair table.
One track of Q-Bench. The Q-Bench record keeps lab scores that combine tracks. Authors introduced image-pair perception in Q-Bench+ in February 2024. This track record retains the parent release month as requested.
- Made by
- Nanyang Technological University and collaborators
- Released
- September 2023
- Kind
- General visual questions
- Level
- Everyday
- Scored
- Checked automatically
- Answers
- Multiple choice
- Tasks
- All public
In the authors’ words
The rapid evolution of Multi-modality Large Language Models (MLLMs) has catalyzed a shift in computer vision from specialized models to general-purpose foundation models. Nevertheless, there is still an inadequacy in assessing the abilities of MLLMs on low-level visual perception and understanding. To address this gap, we present Q-Bench, a holistic benchmark crafted to systematically evaluate potential abilities of MLLMs on three realms: low-level visual perception, low-level visual description, and overall visual quality assessment. a) To evaluate the low-level perception ability, we construct the LLVisionQA dataset, consisting of 2,990 diverse-sourced images, each equipped with a human-asked question focusing on its low-level attributes. We then measure the correctness of MLLMs on answering these questions. b) To examine the description ability of MLLMs on low-level information, we propose the LLDescribe dataset consisting of long expert-labelled golden low-level text descriptions on 499 images, and a GPT-involved comparison pipeline between outputs of MLLMs and the golden descriptions. c) Besides these two tasks, we further measure their visual quality assessment ability to align with human opinion scores. Specifically, we design a softmax-based strategy that enables MLLMs to predict quantifiable quality scores, and evaluate them on various existing image quality assessment (IQA) datasets. Our evaluation across the three abilities confirms that MLLMs possess preliminary low-level visual skills. However, these skills are still unstable and relatively imprecise, indicating the need for specific enhancements on MLLMs towards these abilities. We hope that our benchmark can encourage the research community to delve deeper to discover and enhance these untapped potentials of MLLMs. Project Page: https://q-future.github.io/Q-Bench.
BlueImage-GPT (from VIVO New Champion) tops the leaderboard with 83.5%
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.
- 1 BlueImage-GPT (from VIVO New Champion) 83.5%
- 2 GPT-4V (gpt-4-vision) 78.1%
- 3 Qwen-VL-Max (qwen-vl-max) 67%
- 4 Qwen-VL-Plus (qwen-vl-plus) 61.5%
- 5 Gemini-Pro (gemini-pro-vision) 60.5%
Source: Official Q-Bench Image-Pair Perception leaderboard
| # | Entry | Score | Setting | Date | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | BlueImage-GPT (from VIVO New Champion) | 83.5% | Official leaderboard | ||
| 2 | GPT-4V (gpt-4-vision) | 78.1% | Official leaderboard | ||
| 3 | Qwen-VL-Max (qwen-vl-max) | 67% | Official leaderboard | ||
| 4 | Qwen-VL-Plus (qwen-vl-plus) | 61.5% | Official leaderboard | ||
| 5 | Gemini-Pro (gemini-pro-vision) | 60.5% | Official leaderboard |
No lab model card reports it yet
We read the headline results of 522 launch posts from 52 labs, and none of them list this benchmark.
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%