TVBench
Models answer multiple-choice questions on 10 temporal video tasks, such as action counting and ordering, that static frames cannot solve. Scored by accuracy.
In the authors’ words
Large language models have demonstrated impressive performance when integrated with vision models even enabling video understanding. However, evaluating video models presents its own unique challenges, for which several benchmarks have been proposed. In this paper, we show that the currently most used video-language benchmarks can be solved without requiring much temporal reasoning. We identified three main issues in existing datasets: (i) static information from single frames is often sufficient to solve the tasks (ii) the text of the questions and candidate answers is overly informative, allowing models to answer correctly without relying on any visual input (iii) world knowledge alone can answer many of the questions, making the benchmarks a test of knowledge replication rather than video reasoning. In addition, we found that open-ended question-answering benchmarks for video understanding suffer from similar issues while the automatic evaluation process with LLMs is unreliable, making it an unsuitable alternative. As a solution, we propose TVBench, a novel open-source video multiple-choice question-answering benchmark, and demonstrate through extensive evaluations that it requires a high level of temporal understanding. Surprisingly, we find that most recent state-of-the-art video-language models perform similarly to random performance on TVBench, with only a few models such as Qwen2-VL, and Tarsier clearly surpassing this baseline.
- 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
Qwen 3.8 Max leads with 81.9% among models released by Aug 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 Aug 2026, and nobody has reported a newer one. Among the 20 highest-ranked models on the capability index, these have no score yet:
- GPT-6 Astra
- Claude Opus 5.5
- GPT-6.1 Terra
- GPT-6.1 Sol
- and 16 more
- 1
Qwen 3.8 Max 81.9%
- 2
Seed2.1 Pro 80.5%
- 3
Seed2.0 Lite (0428) 80.4%
- 4
Qwen3.7-Plus 78.2%
- 5
Seed2.0 Pro 75%
- 6
Seed1.8 71.5%
- 7
Seed1.5-VL 63.6%
| # | Model | Score | Setting | Date | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | | 81.9% | Aug 2026 | Model card | |
| 2 | | 80.5% | Jun 2026 | Model card | |
| 3 | | 80.4% | Apr 2026 | Model card | |
| 4 | | 78.2% | Jun 2026 | Model card | |
| 5 | | 75% | Feb 2026 | Model card | |
| 6 | | 71.5% | Dec 2025 | Model card | |
| 7 | | 63.6% | May 2025 | Model card |
6 models have held number one since its release in Oct 2024
Lab claims count from the day the card came out, independent runs from the model’s release.
Scores over time
All the scores we have, one dot each, so a model tested at several settings appears more than once.
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.
| Date | Launch post | Score | As the post writes it |
|---|---|---|---|
| 3 Aug 2026 | 81.9 | TVBench | |
| 23 Jun 2026 | 80.5 | TVBench | |
| 1 Jun 2026 | 78.2 | TVBench | |
| 28 Apr 2026 | 80.4 | TVBench | |
| 14 Feb 2026 | 75 | TVBench | |
| 18 Dec 2025 | 71.5 | TVBench | |
| 12 May 2025 | 63.6 | TVBench |
4 system cards report it, from 1 lab
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 23 Jun 2026 | | 80.5 | TVBench (Table 10) | Capabilities |
| 21 Mar 2026 | | 71.5 | TVBench (Table 3) | Capabilities |
| 14 Feb 2026 | | 75 | TVBench (Table 9) | Capabilities |
| 11 May 2025 | | 63.6 | TVBench, thinking (Table 7). Non-thinking 61.5 | Capabilities |
More 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%
- VideoMME v2 (with subtitles) In use Models answer multiple choice questions about videos with subtitles or audio added. Related questions are scored as groups to penalize guessing.
Qwen 3.8 Max 68.3%