LFM2.5-VL-3B is the stronger all-rounder.
Scores updated · 8 tests both models report · How we compare
Where each one wins
Tests won in each of the one area where both have results. Each piece is one test, so a longer bar means more evidence; grey means the two scored within a point of each other.
The biggest differences
The tests each model wins by the widest margin, up to three each. Scores are out of 100.
Where LFM2.5-VL-3B pulls ahead
Where InternVL3-2B pulls ahead
No clear win on a test scored out of 100.
Every test, side by side
All 8 tests both models report. The winning score is in its model's colour; marks a score checked independently.
Images and chartsLFM2.5-VL-3B
Other results4 tests, not counted
Tests outside the eight areas. They are not counted above: several are summary scores built from other tests, or the same test under another name.
- MM-IFEvalLFM2.5-VL-3B by 22.138.560.6+22.1
- RealWorldQALFM2.5-VL-3B by 865.173.1+8
- POPEInternVL3-2B by 1.490.188.7+1.4
- MMMU (val) (Pass@1)tie48.748.4tie
Questions people ask
Which is better, InternVL3-2B or LFM2.5-VL-3B?
LFM2.5-VL-3B wins the one area where both have results: images and charts. InternVL3-2B wins none.
How do you compare the two?
We use the 8 benchmark tests both models have published scores on. The verdict counts the 4 tests in the eight capability areas, and a gap under one point (ten on rating-style scales) counts as a tie. The other 4 are listed but not counted, because several are summary scores or repeat a test. Each score is the one shown on the model's own page.