PaddleOCR-VL Benchmark Test: Complex Layout Decoding, Who's裸泳?
Comparing PaddleOCR-VL with MinerU2.5, MonkeyOCR, and GPT-4o in handling complex documents. Layout accuracy, hallucination rate, and reading order consistency reveal the details.
The field of document intelligence is bustling with frequent model releases. But in complex scenarios, who can maintain stability?
We took a document mixed with text, tables, formulas, and images and conducted a benchmark test for PaddleOCR-VL, MinerU2.5, MonkeyOCR, and GPT-4o. No parameter comparison, just real-world performance.


The results are clear. PaddleOCR-VL is solid in layout detection, no missed elements, no misclassification. Reading order is coherent, and hallucination content is controlled. Other models have their own ways of failing: missed recognition, wrong classification, messy order, or even creating things out of thin air.
Some users mentioned support for complex scripts like Arabic and Japanese. The official response included test images.


It seems to have targeted optimizations for right-to-left text and mixed layouts. However, some users reported issues when running on Linux with an NVIDIA RTX 4080, so real-world deployment still involves its own pitfalls.
Tool updates often follow this pattern: plenty of highlights in promotions, but details determine success in real use. PaddleOCR-VL's benchmark test data is solid this time, but whether it's worth it depends on your specific document type and system environment.
Next time will be about multilingual text recognition, continuing to monitor real-world performance.
发布时间: 2025-10-22 08:12