Benchmark Almanac

SpatialViz-Bench

Gemini-2.5-pro (snapshot unspecified) 44.7% tops its leaderboard o1 41.4% leads the models we track
STEP3-VL-10B 45.5% leads since January 2026
Only in system cards

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%.

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.

Abstract of SpatialViz-Bench: A Cognitively-Grounded Benchmark for Diagnosing Spatial Visualization in MLLMs (arXiv:2507.07610, CC0)
26
Entries on its own leaderboard, 14 models we track
1
System card reports it, from 1 lab

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:

  1. 1 Gemini-2.5-pro (snapshot unspecified) 44.7%
  2. 2 o1 41.4%
  3. 3 Doubao-1-5-vision-pro direct 37.5%
  4. 4 Gemini-2.5-flash (snapshot unspecified) 36.9%
  5. 5 Qwen-VL-Max direct 36.1%
  6. 6 Qwen2.5-VL-72B direct 35%
  7. 7 Claude 3.7 Sonnet 33.9%
  8. 8 Qwen2.5-VL-32B direct 33.9%
  9. 9 Claude-3.5-sonnet (snapshot unspecified) cot 32.5%
  10. 10 Kimi-VL-A3B-Instruct(16B) direct 32.4%
  11. 11 Llama-4-Maverick-17B-128E-Instruct direct 32%
  12. 12 InternVL3-78B direct 31.7%
  13. 13 Qwen2.5-Omni-7B direct 31.4%
  14. 14 QVQ-72B-Preview direct 31.3%
  15. 15 Deepseek-VL2(27B) direct 31.1%
  16. 16 GPT-4o (snapshot unspecified) cot 31.1%
  17. 17 InternVL3-38B direct 31%
  18. 18 Qwen2.5-VL-7B direct 30.8%
  19. 19 InternVL3-8B direct 30.3%
  20. 20 Qwen2.5-VL-3B direct 30.2%
  21. 21 Kimi-VL-A3B-thinking(16B) direct 30.1%
  22. 22 Deepseek-VL2-tiny(3B) direct 29.6%
  23. 23 SAIL-VL-1.5-2B direct 29.3%
  24. 24 SAIL-VL-1.6-8B direct 29.1%
  25. 25 Deepseek-VL2-small(16B) direct 27.6%
  26. 26 InternVL3-2B 26.2%

Source: Official SpatialViz-Bench leaderboard

#EntryScoreSettingDateSource
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 Qwen2.5-VL-72B 35% direct Jan 2025 Official leaderboard
7 Claude 3.7 Sonnet 33.9% Feb 2025 Official leaderboard
8 Qwen2.5-VL-32B 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 InternVL3-78B 31.7% direct Apr 2025 Official leaderboard
13 Qwen2.5-Omni-7B 31.4% direct Mar 2025 Official leaderboard
14 QVQ-72B-Preview 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 InternVL3-38B 31% direct Apr 2025 Official leaderboard
18 Qwen2.5-VL-7B 30.8% direct Jan 2025 Official leaderboard
19 InternVL3-8B 30.3% direct Apr 2025 Official leaderboard
20 Qwen2.5-VL-3B 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 SAIL-VL-1.6-8B 29.1% direct Apr 2025 Official leaderboard
25 Deepseek-VL2-small(16B) 27.6% direct Official leaderboard
26 InternVL3-2B 26.2% Apr 2025 Official leaderboard
#ModelScoreSettingDateSource
1 STEP3-VL-10B 45.5% Jan 2026 Lab model card
2 Gemini 2.5 Pro Jun 2025 44.7% Jun 2025 Claim in arxiv.org, via Epoch AI
3 o1 41.4% Dec 2024 Official leaderboard
4 Gemini 2.5 Flash Jun 2025 36.9% Jun 2025 Claim in arxiv.org, via Epoch AI
5 Qwen-VL-Max 36.1% direct Jan 2024 Official leaderboard
6 Qwen2.5-VL-72B 35% direct Jan 2025 Official leaderboard
7 Llama 4 Scout 34.2% Apr 2025 Claim in arxiv.org, via Epoch AI
8 Claude 3.7 Sonnet 33.9% Feb 2025 Official leaderboard
9 Qwen2.5-VL-32B 33.9% direct Mar 2025 Official leaderboard
10 Qwen2.5-72B 33.3% Sep 2024 Claim in arxiv.org, via Epoch AI
11 Llama 4 Maverick 31.8% Apr 2025 Claim in arxiv.org, via Epoch AI
12 InternVL3-78B 31.7% direct Apr 2025 Official leaderboard
13 Qwen2.5-Omni-7B 31.4% direct Mar 2025 Official leaderboard
14 QVQ-72B-Preview 31.3% direct Dec 2024 Official leaderboard
15 InternVL3-38B 31% direct Apr 2025 Official leaderboard
16 Qwen2.5-VL-7B 30.8% direct Jan 2025 Official leaderboard
17 InternVL3-8B 30.3% direct Apr 2025 Official leaderboard
18 Qwen2.5-VL-3B 30.2% direct Jan 2025 Official leaderboard
19 SAIL-VL-1.6-8B 29.1% direct Apr 2025 Official leaderboard
20 InternVL3-2B 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.

Lowest effort to highest, light to dark
Qwen-VL-Max
cot direct
36.1%
Qwen2.5-VL-72B
cot direct
35%
Qwen2.5-VL-32B
cot direct
33.9%
InternVL3-78B
cot direct
31.7%
Qwen2.5-Omni-7B
cot direct
31.4%
QVQ-72B-Preview
cot
31.3%
InternVL3-38B
cot direct
31%
Qwen2.5-VL-7B
cot direct
30.8%
InternVL3-8B
cot
30.3%
Qwen2.5-VL-3B
cot direct
30.2%
SAIL-VL-1.6-8B
cot direct
29.1%

Source: Official SpatialViz-Bench leaderboard

ModelEffortHarnessScoreCost per taskOutput tokens
o1 41.4%
Qwen-VL-Max direct 36.1%
Qwen2.5-VL-72B direct 35%
Claude 3.7 Sonnet 33.9%
Qwen2.5-VL-32B direct 33.9%
Qwen2.5-VL-72B cot 33.3%
Qwen2.5-VL-32B cot 32.1%
Qwen-VL-Max cot 32%
InternVL3-78B direct 31.7%
Qwen2.5-Omni-7B direct 31.4%
QVQ-72B-Preview direct 31.3%
InternVL3-38B direct 31%
QVQ-72B-Preview cot 30.9%
Qwen2.5-VL-7B direct 30.8%
InternVL3-8B direct 30.3%
Qwen2.5-VL-3B direct 30.2%
InternVL3-8B cot 30.1%
SAIL-VL-1.6-8B direct 29.1%
Qwen2.5-VL-7B cot 28%
Qwen2.5-Omni-7B cot 27.3%
InternVL3-2B 26.2%
Qwen2.5-VL-3B cot 26.1%
InternVL3-78B cot 25.8%
InternVL3-38B cot 25.4%
SAIL-VL-1.6-8B 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.

OpenAI
Own leaderboard Not tested since Jul 2025
o1 41.4%

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.

On the benchmark’s own leaderboard Reported by the lab in its model card A claim Epoch AI collected from a report or paper Best so far
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 2024 2025 2026 Near the ceiling (85%) STEP3-VL-10B Gemini 2.5 Pro o1 Qwen-VL-Max 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 2024 2025 2026 Near the ceiling (85%) STEP3-VL-10B Qwen-VL-Max

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.

DateDocumentScoreAs the document writes itSection
Jan 14, 2026 STEP3-VL-10B technical report 45.5 SpatialViz-Bench, SeRe (Tables 1 and 3). PaCoRe 52.03 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%