Memory Test
Chimp Test
Numbers flash briefly on screen. Remember their positions, then click them in order. Based on the research that revealed chimpanzees outperform humans at this task.
Chimp Test
Numbers appear briefly. Memorize their positions, then click them in order 1 → N after they vanish.
What the Chimp Test measures
The Chimp Test directly measures visuospatial working memory — your brain's ability to hold and recall the precise spatial positions of objects you have seen briefly. Unlike digit span (which uses verbal rehearsal), this task relies on the visuospatial sketchpad component of working memory.
Visuospatial memory
Encoding and retaining the precise grid positions of each number during the flash window
Sequential processing
Maintaining a strict ordered recall (1→N) while spatial locations are no longer visible
Processing speed
Rapid encoding of multiple spatial positions within the brief display window
Baddeley's Working Memory Model — which component this tests
Score distribution — 8 million scores
The distribution of maximum numbers recalled before first failure. Most users fail at 4–6. Reaching 8 puts you in the top 5%. Chimpanzees trained by Matsuzawa reliably reach 9+.
Max numbers before failure — distribution
| Max numbers | Percentile | Classification | % of users |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2–3 | Bottom 5% | Very low | 5% |
| 4 | 25th | Below average | 20% |
| 5 — human avg | 50th | Average | 28% |
| 6 | 72nd | Above average | 22% |
| 7 | 87th | Strong | 13% |
| 8 | 95th | Elite | 7% |
| 9+ — chimp avg | Top 2% | Chimpanzee territory | <2% |
Data from 8M+ Human Benchmark sessions. "Max numbers" = highest level reached before first incorrect click in a single session.
Humans vs. chimpanzees: the Matsuzawa studies
In 2007, Tetsuro Matsuzawa and colleagues at the Primate Research Institute of Kyoto University published landmark research showing that young chimpanzees outperform adult humans on this exact task. The study was a seismic moment in comparative cognition research.
The Matsuzawa study (2007)
Ayumu, a five-year-old chimpanzee, and two other young chimps competed against adult humans using an identical touchscreen task. Numbers 1–9 appeared briefly (0.2 seconds) on screen, then were masked. The chimps recalled positions with accuracy levels that humans could not match. The research suggested that young chimpanzees possess a form of photographic working memory that humans lose during language development. Published in Current Biology, Vol. 17, Issue 12.
| Metric | Chimpanzee (Ayumu) | Average human | Top human (trained) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Max numbers recalled | 9+ | 4–5 | 8–9 |
| Accuracy at 0.2s flash | ~80% | ~40% | ~65% |
| Performance improvement over training | Rapid, steep | Moderate | Slow after plateau |
| Encoding strategy | Photographic / iconic memory | Spatial mapping + verbal labels | Hybrid strategies |
| Effect of language on performance | Not impacted | Verbal interference degrades performance | Varies by strategy |
The evolutionary trade-off hypothesis
Matsuzawa proposed that humans traded photographic short-term memory for language. As the brain evolved language capabilities, the phonological loop (verbal working memory) expanded and took precedence over the visuospatial sketchpad. Chimpanzees, lacking language, retained the full visuospatial encoding capacity.
This remains debated. Alternative hypotheses suggest the chimp advantage is due to superior attention focus, greater motivation from intensive training protocols (3,000+ sessions), or differences in iconic memory duration. Regardless, the performance gap is real and consistent across multiple replications.
Age effects on visuospatial memory
Visuospatial working memory peaks in the early 20s and declines more steeply with age than verbal working memory. Children under 12 show particularly strong performance on rapid visuospatial encoding tasks.
Average max numbers by age group
| Age group | Avg max numbers | Top 10% | Notable characteristic |
|---|---|---|---|
| 8–11 | 6.2 | 9+ | High iconic memory capacity, fewer verbal interference effects |
| 12–17 | 6.8 | 9+ | Strong performance, gaming experience often helps |
| 18–24 ← Peak | 7.1 | 10+ | Best combination of speed + capacity |
| 25–34 | 6.5 | 9 | Minor decline, strategy use increases |
| 35–49 | 5.8 | 8 | Noticeable decline in flash encoding speed |
| 50–64 | 5.1 | 7 | Visuospatial WM declines faster than verbal WM at this age |
| 65+ | 4.3 | 6 | Significant encoding speed reduction |
Source: Human Benchmark internal analysis of 8M+ sessions segmented by self-reported age.
How to improve your score
Unlike verbal memory, visuospatial memory is difficult to dramatically improve through short-term strategies. However, several approaches yield consistent gains:
Don't sub-vocalize — go spatial
Most people naturally try to remember numbers verbally ("three is top-left, one is center"). This degrades performance by routing through the slower phonological loop. Instead, mentally "paint" the entire pattern as a single spatial snapshot — think of the grid as a picture, not a list.
Scan in a fixed order during flash
Develop a consistent scan pattern during the flash window. Many top performers scan left-to-right top-to-bottom, building a mental snapshot in a predictable sequence. Consistency matters more than the specific pattern you choose.
Practice action video games
Action games that require rapid tracking of multiple objects (RTS games, MOBAs) have been shown to improve visuospatial working memory more than any direct training approach. The transfer effect is stronger for this type of memory than for verbal memory.
Sleep before testing
Visuospatial working memory is particularly sensitive to sleep deprivation. Research shows a larger impairment from sleep loss for spatial tasks than for verbal tasks. Aim to test on ≥7 hours of sleep for your personal best.
Track your chimp test progress
Create a free account to save your scores and see how your visuospatial memory changes over time.
Global statistics
On this page
Key insight
Chimpanzees may have traded language for photographic memory. Humans went the other direction — and it's why we're talking about it.