Benchmark Almanac

TempCompass

Seed2.0 Pro 89.6% leads since Feb 2026 Fading

Video models answer questions about temporal aspects of short clips, such as action order, speed, direction and attribute change, in several question formats.

Clips come in pairs that differ only in one temporal aspect, so single frames cannot answer them.

In the authors’ words

Recently, there is a surge in interest surrounding video large language models (Video LLMs). However, existing benchmarks fail to provide a comprehensive feedback on the temporal perception ability of Video LLMs. On the one hand, most of them are unable to distinguish between different temporal aspects (e.g., speed, direction) and thus cannot reflect the nuanced performance on these specific aspects. On the other hand, they are limited in the diversity of task formats (e.g., only multi-choice QA), which hinders the understanding of how temporal perception performance may vary across different types of tasks. Motivated by these two problems, we propose the TempCompass benchmark, which introduces a diversity of temporal aspects and task formats. To collect high-quality test data, we devise two novel strategies: (1) In video collection, we construct conflicting videos that share the same static content but differ in a specific temporal aspect, which prevents Video LLMs from leveraging single-frame bias or language priors. (2) To collect the task instructions, we propose a paradigm where humans first annotate meta-information for a video and then an LLM generates the instruction. We also design an LLM-based approach to automatically and accurately evaluate the responses from Video LLMs. Based on TempCompass, we comprehensively evaluate 8 state-of-the-art (SOTA) Video LLMs and 3 Image LLMs, and reveal the discerning fact that these models exhibit notably poor temporal perception ability. Our data will be available at https://github.com/llyx97/TempCompass.

Abstract of TempCompass: Do Video LLMs Really Understand Videos? (arXiv:2403.00476, CC0)
Made by Peking University and Huawei Noah Ark Lab (Liu et al.) Released Mar 2024 Video understanding All tasks public Last in a launch post Feb 2026 , dropped after it saturated Last model added Mar 2026
Level
Everyday Most adults, without training
Scored
Checked automatically A program checks the result against an answer key, unit tests or the expected final state.
Answers
Multiple choice
7
Models scored in lab cards
7
Launch posts list it, from 5 labs
5
System cards report it, from 3 labs

Seed2.0 Pro leads with 89.6% among models released by Feb 2026

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.

The newest model with a score here came out in Feb 2026, and nobody has reported a newer one. Among the 20 highest-ranked models on the capability index, these have no score yet:

  1. 1 Seed2.0 Pro 89.6%
  2. 2 Seed1.8 86.9%
  3. 3 Seed1.5-VL 83.7%
  4. 4 LongCat-Flash-Omni 82.2%
  5. 5 V-JEPA 2 76.9%
  6. 6 ERNIE-4.5-VL-28B-A3B-Thinking 75.1%
  7. 7 Qwen2.5-VL-72B 74.8%
#ModelScoreSettingDateSource
1 Seed2.0 Pro 89.6% Feb 2026 Model card
2 Seed1.8 86.9% Dec 2025 Model card
3 Seed1.5-VL 83.7% May 2025 Model card
4 LongCat-Flash-Omni 82.2% Oct 2025 Model card
5 V-JEPA 2 76.9% Jun 2025 Model card
6 ERNIE-4.5-VL-28B-A3B-Thinking 75.1% Nov 2025 Model card
7 Qwen2.5-VL-72B 74.8% Jan 2025 Model card

4 models have held number one since its release in Mar 2024

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

Qwen ByteDance Seed
Lab claims Passed 85% in Dec 2025, by Seed1.8
Seed2.0 Pro 89.6%

The best score passed 85% in Dec 2025

All the scores we have, one dot each, so a model tested at several settings appears more than once.

Reported by the lab in its model card Best so far
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 2025 2026 Near the ceiling (85%) Seed2.0 Pro Seed1.5-VL Qwen2.5-VL-72B 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 2025 2026 Near the ceiling (85%) Seed2.0 Pro Seed1.5-VL

Labs headline it less often now, last in Feb 2026

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
ByteDance Seed
Meta
Meituan
Baidu
DateLaunch postScoreAs the post writes it
14 Feb 2026 Seed2.0 Pro 89.6 TempCompass
18 Dec 2025 Seed1.8 86.9 TempCompass
11 Nov 2025 ERNIE-4.5-VL-28B-A3B-Thinking 75.1 TempCompass
31 Oct 2025 LongCat-Flash-Omni 82.2 TempCompass
11 Jun 2025 V-JEPA 2 76.9 TempCompass (Video QA)
12 May 2025 Seed1.5-VL 83.7 TempCompass
28 Jan 2025 Qwen2.5-VL-72B 74.8 TempCompass_overall

5 system cards report it, from 3 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
21 Mar 2026 Seed1.8 model card 86.9 TempCompass (Table 3) Capabilities
14 Feb 2026 Seed2.0 Pro model card 89.6 TempCompass (Table 9) Capabilities
31 Oct 2025 LongCat-Flash-Omni technical report 82.2 TempCompass (Table 6) Capabilities
11 May 2025 Seed1.5-VL technical report 83.7 TempCompass, thinking (Table 7). Non-thinking 83.1 Capabilities
19 Feb 2025 Qwen2.5-VL-72B technical report 74.8 TempCompass Avg (Table 8) Capabilities

More in Audio and video

All 168 in Audio and video
  • Video-MMMU In use 300 expert-level lecture videos with questions testing perception, comprehension and adaptation of knowledge. Accuracy. Qwen 3.8 Max 88.7%
  • LVBench In use Hours-long video understanding with multiple-choice questions on reasoning, grounding and summarization. Gemini 4 Argon 91.7%
  • MMVU In use 3,000 expert-annotated questions on videos across 27 disciplines. Multiple-choice and open-ended accuracy. Qwen 3.8 Max 82.4%
  • MLVU In use Multi-task long video understanding (minutes to hours) with multiple-choice and generation tasks. Accuracy. Qwen 3.8 Max 90.8%
  • VoiceBench In use Spoken instructions with speaker, environment and content variation. Voice assistant responses scored by GPT judge or rules. Qwen3.5-Omni-Plus 93.1%
  • TVBench In use Models answer multiple-choice questions on 10 temporal video tasks, such as action counting and ordering, that static frames cannot solve. Scored by accuracy. Qwen 3.8 Max 81.9%