SpatialViz-Bench
Models answer 1,180 generated multiple choice puzzles on mental rotation, mental folding, visual penetration, and mental animation. Scoring is accuracy.
A program generates the questions, which limits training contamination. Humans score about 82%.
- Made by
- Siting Wang et al.
- Released
- July 2025
- Kind
- Spatial reasoning and counting
- Level
- Everyday
- Scored
- Checked automatically
- Answers
- Multiple choice
- Tasks
- All public
- Strongest model tested
- o1 #117 on the capability index
- Last in a system card
- January 2026
- Last model added
- January 2026
- Scores refreshed
- November 12th, 2026
In the authors’ words
Humans can imagine and manipulate visual images mentally, a capability known as spatial visualization. While many multi-modal benchmarks assess reasoning on visible visual information, the ability to infer unseen relationships through spatial visualization remains insufficiently evaluated as a spatial skill. This reliance on publicly sourced problems from IQ tests or math competitions risks data contamination and compromises assessment reliability. To this end, we introduce SpatialViz-Bench, a comprehensive multi-modal benchmark for spatial visualization with 12 tasks across 4 sub-abilities, comprising 1,180 programmatically generated problems, a scalable framework that allows for expansion to ensure fair and continuously reliable evaluations. Our evaluation of 27 Multi-modal Large Language Models (MLLMs) reveals wide performance variations, demonstrates the benchmark's strong discriminative power, and uncovers counter-intuitive findings: Chain-of-Thought (CoT) prompting paradoxically degrades accuracy on open-source models. Through statistical and qualitative analysis of error types, SpatialViz-Bench demonstrates that state-of-the-art MLLMs exhibit deficiencies in spatial visualization tasks, thereby addressing a significant lacuna in the field. The benchmark data and evaluation code are publicly available.
Gemini-2.5-pro (snapshot unspecified) tops the leaderboard with 44.7%
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. Every run is in the next chart. 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 o1, at 41.4%.
STEP3-VL-10B leads with 45.5%, 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 2025, and nobody has tested 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
- 44.7 Gemini-2.5-pro (snapshot unspecified)
- 41.4 o1
- 37.5 Doubao-1-5-vision-pro
- 36.9 Gemini-2.5-flash (snapshot unspecified)
- 36.1 Qwen-VL-Max
- 35.0
Qwen2.5-VL-72B
- 33.9 Claude 3.7 Sonnet
- 33.9
Qwen2.5-VL-32B
- 32.5 Claude-3.5-sonnet (snapshot unspecified)
- 32.4 Kimi-VL-A3B-Instruct(16B)
- 32.0 Llama-4-Maverick-17B-128E-Instruct
- 31.7
InternVL3-78B
- 31.4
Qwen2.5-Omni-7B
- 31.3
QVQ-72B-Preview
- 31.1 Deepseek-VL2(27B)
- 31.1 GPT-4o (snapshot unspecified)
- 31.0
InternVL3-38B
- 30.8
Qwen2.5-VL-7B
- 30.3
InternVL3-8B
- 30.2
Qwen2.5-VL-3B
- 30.1 Kimi-VL-A3B-thinking(16B)
- 29.6 Deepseek-VL2-tiny(3B)
- 29.3 SAIL-VL-1.5-2B
- 29.1
SAIL-VL-1.6-8B
- 27.6 Deepseek-VL2-small(16B)
- 26.2
InternVL3-2B
- 1 Gemini-2.5-pro (snapshot unspecified) 44.7%
- 2 o1 41.4%
- 3 Doubao-1-5-vision-pro direct 37.5%
- 4 Gemini-2.5-flash (snapshot unspecified) 36.9%
- 5 Qwen-VL-Max direct 36.1%
- 6
Qwen2.5-VL-72B direct 35%
- 7 Claude 3.7 Sonnet 33.9%
- 8
Qwen2.5-VL-32B direct 33.9%
- 9 Claude-3.5-sonnet (snapshot unspecified) cot 32.5%
- 10 Kimi-VL-A3B-Instruct(16B) direct 32.4%
- 11 Llama-4-Maverick-17B-128E-Instruct direct 32%
- 12
InternVL3-78B direct 31.7%
- 13
Qwen2.5-Omni-7B direct 31.4%
- 14
QVQ-72B-Preview direct 31.3%
- 15 Deepseek-VL2(27B) direct 31.1%
- 16 GPT-4o (snapshot unspecified) cot 31.1%
- 17
InternVL3-38B direct 31%
- 18
Qwen2.5-VL-7B direct 30.8%
- 19
InternVL3-8B direct 30.3%
- 20
Qwen2.5-VL-3B direct 30.2%
- 21 Kimi-VL-A3B-thinking(16B) direct 30.1%
- 22 Deepseek-VL2-tiny(3B) direct 29.6%
- 23 SAIL-VL-1.5-2B direct 29.3%
- 24
SAIL-VL-1.6-8B direct 29.1%
- 25 Deepseek-VL2-small(16B) direct 27.6%
- 26
InternVL3-2B 26.2%
Source: Official SpatialViz-Bench leaderboard
- 45.5
STEP3-VL-10B
- 44.7
Gemini 2.5 Pro
- 41.4 o1
- 36.9
Gemini 2.5 Flash
- 36.1 Qwen-VL-Max
- 35.0
Qwen2.5-VL-72B
- 34.2
Llama 4 Scout
- 33.9 Claude 3.7 Sonnet
- 33.9
Qwen2.5-VL-32B
- 33.3
Qwen2.5-72B
- 31.8
Llama 4 Maverick
- 31.7
InternVL3-78B
- 31.4
Qwen2.5-Omni-7B
- 31.3
QVQ-72B-Preview
- 31.0
InternVL3-38B
- 30.8
Qwen2.5-VL-7B
- 30.3
InternVL3-8B
- 30.2
Qwen2.5-VL-3B
- 29.1
SAIL-VL-1.6-8B
- 26.2
InternVL3-2B
- 1
STEP3-VL-10B 45.5%
- 2
Gemini 2.5 Pro Jun 2025 44.7%
- 3 o1 41.4%
- 4
Gemini 2.5 Flash Jun 2025 36.9%
- 5 Qwen-VL-Max direct 36.1%
- 6
Qwen2.5-VL-72B direct 35%
- 7
Llama 4 Scout 34.2%
- 8 Claude 3.7 Sonnet 33.9%
- 9
Qwen2.5-VL-32B direct 33.9%
- 10
Qwen2.5-72B 33.3%
- 11
Llama 4 Maverick 31.8%
- 12
InternVL3-78B direct 31.7%
- 13
Qwen2.5-Omni-7B direct 31.4%
- 14
QVQ-72B-Preview direct 31.3%
- 15
InternVL3-38B direct 31%
- 16
Qwen2.5-VL-7B direct 30.8%
- 17
InternVL3-8B direct 30.3%
- 18
Qwen2.5-VL-3B direct 30.2%
- 19
SAIL-VL-1.6-8B direct 29.1%
- 20
InternVL3-2B 26.2%
Sources: Labs’ model cards, Another board, via Epoch AI (CC BY 4.0) and official SpatialViz-Bench leaderboard
| # | Entry | Score | Setting | Date | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Gemini-2.5-pro (snapshot unspecified) | 44.7% | Official leaderboard | ||
| 2 | o1 | 41.4% | Dec 2024 | Official leaderboard | |
| 3 | Doubao-1-5-vision-pro | 37.5% | direct | Official leaderboard | |
| 4 | Gemini-2.5-flash (snapshot unspecified) | 36.9% | Official leaderboard | ||
| 5 | Qwen-VL-Max | 36.1% | direct | Jan 2024 | Official leaderboard |
| 6 | | 35% | direct | Jan 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 7 | Claude 3.7 Sonnet | 33.9% | Feb 2025 | Official leaderboard | |
| 8 | | 33.9% | direct | Mar 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 9 | Claude-3.5-sonnet (snapshot unspecified) | 32.5% | cot | Official leaderboard | |
| 10 | Kimi-VL-A3B-Instruct(16B) | 32.4% | direct | Official leaderboard | |
| 11 | Llama-4-Maverick-17B-128E-Instruct | 32% | direct | Official leaderboard | |
| 12 | | 31.7% | direct | Apr 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 13 | | 31.4% | direct | Mar 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 14 | | 31.3% | direct | Dec 2024 | Official leaderboard |
| 15 | Deepseek-VL2(27B) | 31.1% | direct | Official leaderboard | |
| 16 | GPT-4o (snapshot unspecified) | 31.1% | cot | Official leaderboard | |
| 17 | | 31% | direct | Apr 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 18 | | 30.8% | direct | Jan 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 19 | | 30.3% | direct | Apr 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 20 | | 30.2% | direct | Jan 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 21 | Kimi-VL-A3B-thinking(16B) | 30.1% | direct | Official leaderboard | |
| 22 | Deepseek-VL2-tiny(3B) | 29.6% | direct | Official leaderboard | |
| 23 | SAIL-VL-1.5-2B | 29.3% | direct | Official leaderboard | |
| 24 | | 29.1% | direct | Apr 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 25 | Deepseek-VL2-small(16B) | 27.6% | direct | Official leaderboard | |
| 26 | | 26.2% | Apr 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| # | Model | Score | Setting | Date | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | | 45.5% | Jan 2026 | Lab model card | |
| 2 | | 44.7% | Jun 2025 | Claim in arxiv.org, via Epoch AI | |
| 3 | o1 | 41.4% | Dec 2024 | Official leaderboard | |
| 4 | | 36.9% | Jun 2025 | Claim in arxiv.org, via Epoch AI | |
| 5 | Qwen-VL-Max | 36.1% | direct | Jan 2024 | Official leaderboard |
| 6 | | 35% | direct | Jan 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 7 | | 34.2% | Apr 2025 | Claim in arxiv.org, via Epoch AI | |
| 8 | Claude 3.7 Sonnet | 33.9% | Feb 2025 | Official leaderboard | |
| 9 | | 33.9% | direct | Mar 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 10 | | 33.3% | Sep 2024 | Claim in arxiv.org, via Epoch AI | |
| 11 | | 31.8% | Apr 2025 | Claim in arxiv.org, via Epoch AI | |
| 12 | | 31.7% | direct | Apr 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 13 | | 31.4% | direct | Mar 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 14 | | 31.3% | direct | Dec 2024 | Official leaderboard |
| 15 | | 31% | direct | Apr 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 16 | | 30.8% | direct | Jan 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 17 | | 30.3% | direct | Apr 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 18 | | 30.2% | direct | Jan 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 19 | | 29.1% | direct | Apr 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 20 | | 26.2% | Apr 2025 | Official leaderboard |
Labs report scores for 1 model in their cards. Epoch AI collected claims for 8 models from labs’ reports and papers. Switch the scores above to rank them together.
Scores at each effort level
Models the leaderboard ran at two or more effort levels. We don’t have enough cost data here to say what the extra effort costs.
Source: Official SpatialViz-Bench leaderboard
| Model | Effort | Harness | Score | Cost per task | Output tokens |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| o1 | 41.4% | ||||
| Qwen-VL-Max | direct | 36.1% | |||
| | direct | 35% | |||
| Claude 3.7 Sonnet | 33.9% | ||||
| | direct | 33.9% | |||
| | cot | 33.3% | |||
| | cot | 32.1% | |||
| Qwen-VL-Max | cot | 32% | |||
| | direct | 31.7% | |||
| | direct | 31.4% | |||
| | direct | 31.3% | |||
| | direct | 31% | |||
| | cot | 30.9% | |||
| | direct | 30.8% | |||
| | direct | 30.3% | |||
| | direct | 30.2% | |||
| | cot | 30.1% | |||
| | direct | 29.1% | |||
| | cot | 28% | |||
| | cot | 27.3% | |||
| | 26.2% | ||||
| | cot | 26.1% | |||
| | cot | 25.8% | |||
| | cot | 25.4% | |||
| | cot | 25% |
Number one over time 2 models have held number one with claims included since its release in July 2025
Lab claims count from the day the card came out, independent runs from the model’s release.
Source: Official SpatialViz-Bench leaderboard
Scores over time
All the scores we have, one dot each, so a model tested at several settings appears more than once.
Sources: Official SpatialViz-Bench leaderboard, labs’ model cards and claims collected by Epoch AI (CC BY 4.0)
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.
| Date | Document | Score | As the document writes it | Section |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 14, 2026 | | 45.5 | SpatialViz-Bench, SeRe (Tables 1 and 3). PaCoRe 52.03 | 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%