Beam 1.0 501B A23B 49.4/100Rank 18/47

STEALTHMARK · HEAD TO HEAD
All comparisons ↗Beam 1.0 501B A23B leads Iceman Contributor by 12.7 points on StealthMark, 31.9 to 19.2. It leads on 8 of 9 benchmarks, including both games, and Iceman Contributor on 1. Beam 1.0 501B A23B scores higher on Newton's Mirror, with its largest category advantage in state at 600 ms.
See the difference ↘On every task, result quality and reasoning tokens are each compared with all measured models and weighed equally. Each dot is one model.
BENCHMARK BY BENCHMARK
DATASHEET
Beam 1.0 501B A23B scores higher on StealthMark and runs 21× faster in our speed test.
Full datasheets, every price and sourceBeam 1.0 501B A23B ↗
Anticipating threats and planning ahead. Collect coins while avoiding ghosts. Ghosts move before the player each turn, and collisions cost a life. 3 levels in sequence, up to 66 turns in total. Earlier moves and outcomes carry forward, testing learning across levels.


Cooperative planning and learning from experience. Coordinate two robots to push numbered cores onto matching sockets. Pressure plates hold doors open; moving either robot uses one turn. 5 levels in sequence, up to 152 turns in total. Earlier moves and outcomes carry forward, testing learning across levels.


Physics, perspective and recursive reflections, tested together. Explore the test ↗


Beam 1.0 501B A23B
Central object placement is fairly close, but the defining mirrored-room structure is missing. The paint colors suggest the required contact order without establishing their different interaction histories. The faint floor oval does not demonstrate valid reflection geometry, so it earns no reflection credit. Rounded volume and glossy paint provide limited material credit despite weak metallic finishes and oversized paint bodies.
Iceman Contributor
The image provides limited evidence through rounded volume, faint wall strips and floor echoes. Its main sphere is small and low, the paint beads do not establish the required interaction history, and most of the defining mirror structure is missing.
| Category | Beam 1.0 501B A23B | Iceman Contributor |
|---|---|---|
| State at 600 ms | 20.5/25 | 0.5/25 |
| Camera and placement | 11.5/15 | 2.5/15 |
| Reflections | 2.0/120 | 7.5/120 |
| Materials and scale | 3.0/10 | 3.0/10 |
| Floor-damage reward | 0.0/10 | 0.0/10 |
A spinning metal sphere and paint in a mirrored room test physical reasoning, perspective and consistency across repeated reflections.
Visual construction and creative interpretation.


Beam 1.0 501B A23B
An appealing expression and warm palette support a coherent simple cartoon. The central polishing joke is not legible: the cloth is unresolved and the nose sits away from the fan. Pointed radial plates, uncertain limb attachments and weak ground contact limit construction, while restrained surface detail limits material richness.
Iceman Contributor
The crystal crown, cyan eyes and blue faceting communicate an icy fantasy character. Anatomical readability is substantially weaker: the ringed torso, crowded facial construction and fingerless appendages do not resolve the requested childlike crouch or pouncing gesture. Sparse surface detail and shallow shading further limit the result.
| Category | Beam 1.0 501B A23B | Iceman Contributor |
|---|---|---|
| Task & likeness | 4.0/10 | 4.0/10 |
| Anatomy & construction | 3.5/10 | 3.0/10 |
| Space & placement | 5.5/10 | 4.0/10 |
| Light & reflections | 5.5/10 | 4.5/10 |
| Purposeful detail | 4.5/10 | 4.0/10 |
| Artistry & character | 4.0/10 | 4.5/10 |
| Materials & effects | 4.5/10 | 4.5/10 |
| Visual integrity | 7.0/10 | 4.0/10 |
Beam 1.0 501B A23B
A golden pangolin polishes its oversized amber tail while its nose smudges the same scale. The scene tests expressive anatomy, physical contact and contrasting translucent, polished and soft materials.
Iceman Contributor
Character scenes test expression, anatomy, materials and coherent visual construction.
Precise visual recall and portrait reconstruction.


Beam 1.0 501B A23B
The candidate shows a faint warm oval against an almost entirely black field. Minimal placement and smooth tonal variation are visible, but the portrait, anatomy, crossed hands and landscape remain unreadable. The saved comparisons provide no specific evidence supporting a change to the baseline categories.
Iceman Contributor
The portrait retains a dark silhouette against an earthy landscape, but replication is weak. The frontal body, elongated facial proportions and undifferentiated hands lose the reference's defining pose and likeness. Basic gradients and layered hills provide some coherence, with little anatomical or painterly detail.
| Category | Beam 1.0 501B A23B | Iceman Contributor |
|---|---|---|
| Task & likeness | 0.0/10 | 1.5/10 |
| Anatomy & construction | 0.0/10 | 1.5/10 |
| Space & placement | 0.0/10 | 2.5/10 |
| Light & reflections | 0.5/10 | 2.0/10 |
| Purposeful detail | 0.0/10 | 2.0/10 |
| Artistry & character | 0.0/10 | 2.0/10 |
| Materials & effects | 0.0/10 | 2.0/10 |
| Visual integrity | 0.0/10 | 3.0/10 |
An SVG interpretation of the Mona Lisa tests facial likeness, anatomy and the composition of a familiar portrait.
Creativity, perspective and visual beauty.


Beam 1.0 501B A23B
A coherent, cheerful beach illustration fulfills the main subjects with clean shapes and a strong sunset focal point. Its basic geometric construction, ambiguous animal anatomy, shallow depth and schematic lighting limit its accomplishment. Decorative details provide interest without developing intricate forms or convincing physical surfaces.
Iceman Contributor
A coherent sunset beach with recognizable animals, playful details and effective palm framing. Connected silhouettes and layered scenery support modest construction and placement credit. Jointless figures, limited foreshortening and an inadequately separated sun and reflection keep the execution basic despite its attractive color.
| Category | Beam 1.0 501B A23B | Iceman Contributor |
|---|---|---|
| Task & likeness | 7.0/10 | 7.0/10 |
| Anatomy & construction | 5.0/10 | 3.5/10 |
| Space & placement | 6.0/10 | 6.0/10 |
| Light & reflections | 5.0/10 | 4.0/10 |
| Purposeful detail | 5.5/10 | 5.5/10 |
| Artistry & character | 4.0/10 | 3.5/10 |
| Materials & effects | 5.0/10 | 4.5/10 |
| Visual integrity | 5.0/10 | 5.0/10 |
A busy shoreline at sunset tests scene composition, animal forms and the relationship between light and water reflections.
Physical reasoning, light and visual reconstruction.


Beam 1.0 501B A23B
This benchmark has not been assessed yet.
Iceman Contributor
This benchmark has not been assessed yet.
A plank, computer mouse and blueberry in a steel room test physical stability, spatial relationships, materials and lighting.
Scene composition and interacting subjects.


Beam 1.0 501B A23B
A cheerful, readable illustration with recognizable animals, expressive faces and useful accessories. Simple rounded construction limits complexity, while ambiguous steering attachments and weak hull-to-water contact reduce physical coherence. Lighting and surface effects establish the setting without convincing environmental interaction.
Iceman Contributor
The sunset palette and red hull establish an appealing setting, but the central interaction remains unresolved. Overlapping bodies obscure the dog, supported seating is unclear, and no readable paw-to-control grip demonstrates steering. Simple construction, weak environmental lighting and loosely described spray limit depth and finish.
| Category | Beam 1.0 501B A23B | Iceman Contributor |
|---|---|---|
| Task & likeness | 5.0/10 | 2.0/10 |
| Anatomy & construction | 3.5/10 | 3.0/10 |
| Space & placement | 5.5/10 | 3.0/10 |
| Light & reflections | 4.0/10 | 4.0/10 |
| Purposeful detail | 6.5/10 | 3.5/10 |
| Artistry & character | 3.5/10 | 2.5/10 |
| Materials & effects | 5.0/10 | 4.0/10 |
| Visual integrity | 6.5/10 | 2.5/10 |
A jet-ski scene pairs a canine driver with a raccoon passenger. It tests the placement and contact of interacting subjects, along with vehicle construction.
Subject construction and spatial relationships.


Beam 1.0 501B A23B
A cheerful, clearly readable pelican-and-bicycle illustration with clean contours and balanced composition. Simple geometric construction limits artistic complexity, while ambiguous neck and steering overlaps, merged pedal contacts and an incomplete drivetrain weaken physical coherence.
Iceman Contributor
A recognizable pelican and bicycle sit within an appealing sunset composition. Feather contours, bill shape and atmospheric colour provide character, but disconnected-looking leg origins, unclear pedal contact and unresolved steering weaken the central riding action. Consistent wheel alignment establishes a side view without resolving the rider's support.
| Category | Beam 1.0 501B A23B | Iceman Contributor |
|---|---|---|
| Task & likeness | 5.5/10 | 4.0/10 |
| Anatomy & construction | 4.5/10 | 3.5/10 |
| Space & placement | 5.0/10 | 3.5/10 |
| Light & reflections | 4.0/10 | 5.0/10 |
| Purposeful detail | 4.0/10 | 4.5/10 |
| Artistry & character | 4.0/10 | 3.5/10 |
| Materials & effects | 4.0/10 | 4.0/10 |
| Visual integrity | 5.5/10 | 3.0/10 |
A cycling pelican tests anatomy, riding posture and contact between the bird and the bicycle.