Benchmark Almanac

SEED-Bench-2

MindAD 72.4% tops its leaderboard Qwen-VL-Plus 71.9% leads the models we track
Not in model cards

Multimodal models answer multiple-choice questions that cover comprehension of interleaved image and text inputs and image generation, in hierarchical capability levels.

Adds interleaved and generation tasks, so scores do not compare with SEED-Bench.

Released
November 2023
Kind
General visual questions
Level
Everyday
Scored
Checked automatically
Answers
Multiple choice
Tasks
All public
Strongest model tested
Claude 3 Opus #172 on the capability index
Last model added
February 2024
Scores refreshed
November 12th, 2026

In the authors’ words

Multimodal large language models (MLLMs), building upon the foundation of powerful large language models (LLMs), have recently demonstrated exceptional capabilities in generating not only texts but also images given interleaved multimodal inputs (acting like a combination of GPT-4V and DALL-E 3). However, existing MLLM benchmarks remain limited to assessing only models' comprehension ability of single image-text inputs, failing to keep up with the strides made in MLLMs. A comprehensive benchmark is imperative for investigating the progress and uncovering the limitations of current MLLMs. In this work, we categorize the capabilities of MLLMs into hierarchical levels from L₀ to L₄ based on the modalities they can accept and generate, and propose SEED-Bench-2, a comprehensive benchmark that evaluates the hierarchical capabilities of MLLMs. Specifically, SEED-Bench-2 comprises 24K multiple-choice questions with accurate human annotations, which spans 27 dimensions, including the evaluation of both text and image generation. Multiple-choice questions with groundtruth options derived from human annotation enables an objective and efficient assessment of model performance, eliminating the need for human or GPT intervention during evaluation. We further evaluate the performance of 23 prominent open-source MLLMs and summarize valuable observations. By revealing the limitations of existing MLLMs through extensive evaluations, we aim for SEED-Bench-2 to provide insights that will motivate future research towards the goal of General Artificial Intelligence. Dataset and evaluation code are available at https://github.com/AILab-CVC/SEED-Bench

Abstract of SEED-Bench-2: Benchmarking Multimodal Large Language Models (arXiv:2311.17092, CC0)
31
Entries on its own leaderboard, 5 models we track

MindAD tops the leaderboard with 72.4%

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 Qwen-VL-Plus, at 71.9%.

The newest model with a score here came out in February 2024, and nobody has tested a newer one. Among the 20 highest-ranked models on the capability index, these have no score yet:

  1. 1 MindAD Generate 72.4%
  2. 2 SPHINXv2-1k Generate 72.1%
  3. 3 Qwen-VL-Plus PPL for A/B/C/D 71.9%
  4. 4 GPT-4V [snapshot unspecified] Generate 69.8%
  5. 5 SPHINXv1-1k Generate 68.5%
  6. 6 InternLM-XComposer-VL PPL for A/B/C/D 66.5%
  7. 7 VisionLLaMA Generate 66.1%
  8. 8 Gemini-Pro-Vision [snapshot unspecified] Generate 62.9%
  9. 9 LLaVA-1.5 PPL 58.3%
  10. 10 InstructBLIP PPL 52.4%
  11. 11 Kosmos-2 PPL 52.4%
  12. 12 Qwen-VL-Chat PPL 50.3%
  13. 13 SEED-LLaMA PPL 49.9%
  14. 14 InstructBLIP-Vicuna PPL 47.5%
  15. 15 BLIP-2 PPL 46.8%
  16. 16 Emu PPL 46.4%
  17. 17 MiniGPT-4 PPL 45%
  18. 18 LLaVA PPL 42.4%
  19. 19 Claude 3 Opus Generate 42%
  20. 20 IDEFICS-9B-Instruct PPL 38.8%
  21. 21 mPLUG-Owl PPL 38.6%
  22. 22 Video-ChatGPT PPL 38.3%
  23. 23 MultiModal-GPT PPL 36.7%
  24. 24 VideoChat PPL 36.7%
  25. 25 OpenFlamingo PPL 36.6%
  26. 26 VPGTrans PPL 36.6%
  27. 27 LLaMA-AdapterV2 PPL 36%
  28. 28 Otter PPL 36%
  29. 29 Valley PPL 35.3%
  30. 30 GVT PPL 34.9%
  31. 31 Next-GPT PPL 31%

Source: Official SEED-Bench-2 leaderboard

#EntryScoreSettingDateSource
1 MindAD 72.4% Generate Official leaderboard
2 SPHINXv2-1k 72.1% Generate Official leaderboard
3 Qwen-VL-Plus 71.9% PPL for A/B/C/D Jan 2024 Official leaderboard
4 GPT-4V [snapshot unspecified] 69.8% Generate Official leaderboard
5 SPHINXv1-1k 68.5% Generate Official leaderboard
6 InternLM-XComposer-VL 66.5% PPL for A/B/C/D Official leaderboard
7 VisionLLaMA 66.1% Generate Official leaderboard
8 Gemini-Pro-Vision [snapshot unspecified] 62.9% Generate Official leaderboard
9 LLaVA-1.5 58.3% PPL Official leaderboard
10 InstructBLIP 52.4% PPL Official leaderboard
11 Kosmos-2 52.4% PPL Jun 2023 Official leaderboard
12 Qwen-VL-Chat 50.3% PPL Aug 2023 Official leaderboard
13 SEED-LLaMA 49.9% PPL Official leaderboard
14 InstructBLIP-Vicuna 47.5% PPL Official leaderboard
15 BLIP-2 46.8% PPL Official leaderboard
16 Emu 46.4% PPL Official leaderboard
17 MiniGPT-4 45% PPL Official leaderboard
18 LLaVA 42.4% PPL Official leaderboard
19 Claude 3 Opus 42% Generate Feb 2024 Official leaderboard
20 IDEFICS-9B-Instruct 38.8% PPL Jul 2023 Official leaderboard
21 mPLUG-Owl 38.6% PPL Official leaderboard
22 Video-ChatGPT 38.3% PPL Official leaderboard
23 MultiModal-GPT 36.7% PPL Official leaderboard
24 VideoChat 36.7% PPL Official leaderboard
25 OpenFlamingo 36.6% PPL Official leaderboard
26 VPGTrans 36.6% PPL Official leaderboard
27 LLaMA-AdapterV2 36% PPL Official leaderboard
28 Otter 36% PPL Official leaderboard
29 Valley 35.3% PPL Official leaderboard
30 GVT 34.9% PPL Official leaderboard
31 Next-GPT 31% PPL Official leaderboard

2 models have held number one on the official leaderboard since its release in November 2023

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

Microsoft Qwen
Own leaderboard Not tested since Feb 2024
Qwen-VL-Plus 71.9%

Source: Official SEED-Bench-2 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 Best so far
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 2023 2024 Near the ceiling (85%) Qwen-VL-Plus Kosmos-2 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 2023 2024 Near the ceiling (85%) Qwen-VL-Plus Kosmos-2

Source: Official SEED-Bench-2 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.

Versions

We switch the top row to each new version when it comes out. Open it for one row per version. An old version stays in play while people still test it, so whoever first takes it past 85% gets credit for closing it out.

Microsoft Other labs University of Wisconsin-Madison OpenAI Shanghai AI Lab Qwen
SEED-Bench-2 Not tested since Feb 2024
Qwen-VL-Plus 71.9%
SEED-Bench Replaced by 2, Feb 2024
SEED-Bench-2 Not tested since Feb 2024
Qwen-VL-Plus 71.9%

Source: Official leaderboards

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%