Benchmark Almanac

MedXpertQA-MM

Qwen 3.8 Max 80.4% leads since Aug 2026 In use

Models answer expert-level medical exam questions that combine images with clinical records and test results. Scoring is accuracy.

This is the multimodal subset of MedXpertQA, which has 4,460 questions in total across its Text and MM subsets.

In the authors’ words

We introduce MedXpertQA, a highly challenging and comprehensive benchmark to evaluate expert-level medical knowledge and advanced reasoning. MedXpertQA includes 4,460 questions spanning 17 specialties and 11 body systems. It includes two subsets, Text for text evaluation and MM for multimodal evaluation. Notably, MM introduces expert-level exam questions with diverse images and rich clinical information, including patient records and examination results, setting it apart from traditional medical multimodal benchmarks with simple QA pairs generated from image captions. MedXpertQA applies rigorous filtering and augmentation to address the insufficient difficulty of existing benchmarks like MedQA, and incorporates specialty board questions to improve clinical relevance and comprehensiveness. We perform data synthesis to mitigate data leakage risk and conduct multiple rounds of expert reviews to ensure accuracy and reliability. We evaluate 18 leading models on \benchmark. Moreover, medicine is deeply connected to real-world decision-making, providing a rich and representative setting for assessing reasoning abilities beyond mathematics and code. To this end, we develop a reasoning-oriented subset to facilitate the assessment of o1-like models. Code and data are available at: https://github.com/TsinghuaC3I/MedXpertQA

Abstract of MedXpertQA: Benchmarking Expert-Level Medical Reasoning and Understanding (arXiv:2501.18362, CC0)
Made by Tsinghua University (TsinghuaC3I) Released Jan 2025 Medicine All tasks public Last in a launch post Aug 2026 Last model added Oct 2026 Scores refreshed 2 Nov 2026
Level
Expert Specialists with years of training, often over hours of work
Scored
Checked automatically A program checks the result against an answer key, unit tests or the expected final state.
Answers
Multiple choice
12
Models scored in lab cards
11
Launch posts list it, from 5 labs
5
System cards report it, from 4 labs

Qwen 3.8 Max leads with 80.4%

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.

  1. 1 Qwen 3.8 Max 80.4%
  2. 2 Seed2.0 Lite (0428) 79.6%
  3. 3 Muse Spark 78.4%
  4. 4 Qwen3.7-Plus 71%
  5. 5 Qwen3.5 397B-A17B 70%
  6. 6 Qwen3.5-122B-A10B 67.3%
  7. 7 Gemma 4 31B IT 61.3%
  8. 8 Gemma 4 26B A4B 58.1%
  9. 9 Qwen3.5-Omni-Plus 54.7%
  10. 10 DiffusionGemma 26B A4B 49%
  11. 11 EXAONE 4.5 33B 42.1%
  12. 12 Nemotron 3.5 Bolt E4B 26.9%
#ModelScoreSettingDateSource
1 Qwen 3.8 Max 80.4% Aug 2026 Model card
2 Seed2.0 Lite (0428) 79.6% Apr 2026 Model card
3 Muse Spark 78.4% Apr 2026 Model card
4 Qwen3.7-Plus 71% Jun 2026 Model card
5 Qwen3.5 397B-A17B 70% Feb 2026 Model card
6 Qwen3.5-122B-A10B 67.3% Feb 2026 Model card
7 Gemma 4 31B IT 61.3% Apr 2026 Model card
8 Gemma 4 26B A4B 58.1% Apr 2026 Model card
9 Qwen3.5-Omni-Plus 54.7% Mar 2026 Model card
10 DiffusionGemma 26B A4B 49% Jun 2026 Model card
11 EXAONE 4.5 33B 42.1% Apr 2026 Model card
12 Nemotron 3.5 Bolt E4B 26.9% Oct 2026 Model card

The benchmark's own leaderboard has 9 models. We plot every source in the charts below.

Number one over time

Lab claims count from the day the card came out, independent runs from the model’s release. We draw one row each for the benchmark’s own leaderboard and what labs claim in their cards.

OpenAI Qwen Meta ByteDance Seed
Own leaderboard Not tested since Jan 2025
o1 56.3%
Lab claims 4 leaders
Qwen 3.8 Max 80.4%

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 Best so far
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 2024 2025 2026 2027 Near the ceiling (85%) Qwen 3.8 Max Qwen3.5 397B-A17B o1 GPT-4o Gemini 1.5 Pro 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 2024 2025 2026 2027 Near the ceiling (85%) Qwen 3.8 Max Qwen3.5 397B-A17B

2 labs put it in a launch post in the last six months

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.

Qwen
Google DeepMind
Meta
LG AI Research
ByteDance Seed
DateLaunch postScoreAs the post writes it
3 Aug 2026 Qwen 3.8 Max 80.4 MedXpertQA-MM
10 Jun 2026 DiffusionGemma 26B A4B 49 MedXPertQA MM
1 Jun 2026 Qwen3.7-Plus 71 MedXpertQA-MM
28 Apr 2026 Seed2.0 Lite (0428) 79.6 MedXpertQA-MM
9 Apr 2026 EXAONE 4.5 33B 42.1 MedXpertQA-MM
8 Apr 2026 Muse Spark 78.4 MedXpertQA (MM)
2 Apr 2026 Gemma 4 26B A4B 58.1 MedXPertQA MM
2 Apr 2026 Gemma 4 31B IT 61.3 MedXPertQA MM
30 Mar 2026 Qwen3.5-Omni-Plus 54.7 MedXpertQA-MM
24 Feb 2026 Qwen3.5-122B-A10B 67.3 MedXpertQA-MM
16 Feb 2026 Qwen3.5 397B-A17B 70 MedXpertQA-MM

5 system cards report it, from 4 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.

DateDocumentScoreAs the document writes itSection
23 Oct 2026 Nemotron 3.5 Bolt E4B technical report 26.9 MedXpertQA Vision, reasoning, 23.10 non-reasoning (Table 8) Health
24 Jul 2026 Gemma 4 31B IT technical report 61.3 MedXPertQA MM, thinking, max resolution (Table 6) Capabilities
24 Jul 2026 Gemma 4 26B A4B technical report 58.1 MedXPertQA MM, thinking, max resolution (Table 6) Capabilities
17 Apr 2026 Qwen3.5-Omni-Plus technical report 54.7 MedXpertQA-MM (Table 6) Health
9 Apr 2026 EXAONE 4.5 33B technical report 42.1 MedXpertQA-MM (Table 2, Reasoning mode) Health

More in Law, finance and medicine

All 140 in Law, finance and medicine
  • HealthBench Professional In use 525 physician-authored tasks from real clinician chats (care consult, documentation, research) with physician-adjudicated rubrics. Claude Sonnet 5.5 69.2%
  • HealthBench In use 5,000 realistic health conversations graded against physician-written rubrics. A length-adjusted variant penalizes verbosity. GPT-5 67.2%
  • KBL In use Models answer Korean legal knowledge and reasoning tasks and Korean bar exam questions. It has 7 knowledge tasks, 4 reasoning tasks and 2,510 bar exam items. Solar Pro 4 77.5%
  • KorMedMCQA In use Models answer 7,469 multiple-choice questions from Korean licensing exams for doctors, nurses, pharmacists and dentists, held from 2012 to 2024. Solar Pro 4 93.2%
  • PRBench In use Model answers 1,100 expert-written law and finance questions. LLM judge grades against weighted expert rubrics of 10-30 criteria each. Muse Spark 1.3 61.6%
  • FrontierFinance In use Agents answer 220 investment research queries from finance experts across six use cases of the investor workflow. Three judge models check each answer against 11,543 source-attributed rubrics. Claude Fable 5.1 55.9%