STEALTHMARK · HEAD TO HEAD
All comparisons ↗GPT-5.5 vs Iceman Contributor
GPT-5.5 leads Iceman Contributor by 12.1 points on StealthMark, 31.3 to 19.2. It leads on 5 of the 7 benchmarks with results for both and Iceman Contributor on 2. GPT-5.5 scores higher on Newton's Mirror, with its largest category advantage in state at 600 ms.
See the difference ↘Overall StealthMark
General Intelligence
Visual Intelligence
Reasoning efficiency
On every task, result quality and reasoning tokens are each compared with all measured models and weighed equally. Each dot is one model.
Single-step reasoning Result quality weighed against reasoning tokens on a single problem
Multi-step reasoning Result quality weighed against reasoning tokens across connected steps, as in agentic workflows
- GPT-5.5Multi-step reasoning not measured
BENCHMARK BY BENCHMARK
Where each model leads
- GPT-5.5
- Iceman Contributor
- Other models
- Median
Games
SVG
DATASHEET
Specs and pricing
GPT-5.5 scores higher on StealthMark and runs 4.2× faster in our speed test.
- GPT-5.5
- Iceman Contributor
- Other models
- Median
- Developer
- OpenAINot published
- Released
- 23 Apr 2026Not published
- Origin
- United StatesNot published
- Input → output
- Text, image → textNot published
Full datasheets, every price and sourceGPT-5.5 ↗
Foresight
Play Foresight yourselfAnticipating 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.
Iceman Contributor 3.2/100Rank 47/47

Points per level
Latch
Play Latch yourselfCooperative 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.
GPT-5.5No run
Iceman Contributor 3.6/100Rank 44/48

Points per level
Newton's Mirror
Same task instructionsPhysics, perspective and recursive reflections, tested together. Explore the test ↗
GPT-5.5 22.7/100 Rank 35/53

Iceman Contributor 10.1/100 Rank 48/53

The judgment
GPT-5.5
The paint ordering and separate black bead support part of the physical state, but adhesion and rotational transport remain only partly established. The sweeping cyan arc and long crimson lobes do not clearly communicate the limited time since their respective impacts. The main sphere is too large and too low, and the black bead is below its required projected position. Displaced isolated sphere images, a flattened floor echo and missing recursive, nested and emitter reflections provide little coherent optical structure. The colored paint is excessively bulky for the specified quantities.
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.
Score breakdown
| Category | GPT-5.5 | Iceman Contributor |
|---|---|---|
| State at 600 ms | 15.0/25 | 0.5/25 |
| Camera and placement | 6.0/15 | 2.5/15 |
| Reflections | 5.0/120 | 7.5/120 |
| Materials and scale | 6.0/10 | 3.0/10 |
| Floor-damage reward | 0.0/10 | 0.0/10 |
Benchmark task
A spinning metal sphere and paint in a mirrored room test physical reasoning, perspective and consistency across repeated reflections.
Selfie
Different task instructionsVisual construction and creative interpretation.
GPT-5.5 41.9/100 Rank 48/53

Iceman Contributor 39.3/100 Rank 49/53

The judgment
GPT-5.5
Six pale, scaled lobes form a balanced radial arrangement, but they remain separate capsules rather than an interlocking serpent knot. There are no crossings, alternating overlaps, or crisp inner bends; the central hexagon is an isolated outline. Small outward-facing heads sit within the lobes without integrated necks. Soft shading and tidy contours provide some finish, while repetitive oval scales and cartoon faces limit organic credibility.
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.
Score breakdown
| Category | GPT-5.5 | Iceman Contributor |
|---|---|---|
| Task & likeness | 3.0/10 | 4.0/10 |
| Anatomy & construction | 3.0/10 | 3.0/10 |
| Space & placement | 5.0/10 | 4.0/10 |
| Light & reflections | 5.0/10 | 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 |
Benchmark task
GPT-5.5
A pale serpent woven into an interlocking knot tests connected anatomy, repeated structure and readable overlaps. Organic surface detail must work with the overall geometry.
Iceman Contributor
Character scenes test expression, anatomy, materials and coherent visual construction.
Mona Lisa
Different task instructionsPrecise visual recall and portrait reconstruction.
GPT-5.5 17.3/100 Rank 43/53

Iceman Contributor 19.3/100 Rank 41/53

The judgment
GPT-5.5
The veil, restrained smile, crossed hands and muted landscape establish Mona Lisa references. The oversized frontal face and schematic features weaken likeness and expression, while fingerless tapered hand shapes leave anatomy unresolved. Clean contours and balanced framing provide coherence, but sparse garment detail, broad landscape bands and shallow shading limit the portrait's sophistication.
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.
Score breakdown
| Category | GPT-5.5 | Iceman Contributor |
|---|---|---|
| Task & likeness | 1.5/10 | 1.5/10 |
| Anatomy & construction | 1.5/10 | 1.5/10 |
| Space & placement | 1.5/10 | 2.5/10 |
| Light & reflections | 2.0/10 | 2.0/10 |
| Purposeful detail | 2.5/10 | 2.0/10 |
| Artistry & character | 1.5/10 | 2.0/10 |
| Materials & effects | 2.0/10 | 2.0/10 |
| Visual integrity | 1.5/10 | 3.0/10 |
Benchmark task
An SVG interpretation of the Mona Lisa tests facial likeness, anatomy and the composition of a familiar portrait.
Beach
Different task instructionsCreativity, perspective and visual beauty.
GPT-5.5 34.9/100 Rank 49/53

Iceman Contributor 46.4/100 Rank 42/53

The judgment
GPT-5.5
The sunset, palms, birds, playful animals and ball clearly establish the requested beach scene. Warm sky gradients and clean silhouettes make it appealing. Animal construction is underdeveloped: torso and limb connections are unclear, especially in the round-eared foreground figure. The dolphin lacks a convincing splash, and broad reflection bands suggest sunset light without resolving its behavior on water.
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.
Score breakdown
| Category | GPT-5.5 | Iceman Contributor |
|---|---|---|
| Task & likeness | 7.0/10 | 7.0/10 |
| Anatomy & construction | 2.5/10 | 3.5/10 |
| Space & placement | 3.0/10 | 6.0/10 |
| Light & reflections | 3.0/10 | 4.0/10 |
| Purposeful detail | 3.0/10 | 5.5/10 |
| Artistry & character | 3.0/10 | 3.5/10 |
| Materials & effects | 3.0/10 | 4.5/10 |
| Visual integrity | 3.5/10 | 5.0/10 |
Benchmark task
A busy shoreline at sunset tests scene composition, animal forms and the relationship between light and water reflections.
Ground Truth
Different task instructionsPhysical reasoning, light and visual reconstruction.
GPT-5.5 40.8/100 Rank 27/53

Iceman Contributor 20.2/100 Rank 46/53

The judgment
GPT-5.5
This benchmark has not been assessed yet.
Iceman Contributor
This benchmark has not been assessed yet.
Benchmark task
A plank, computer mouse and blueberry in a steel room test physical stability, spatial relationships, materials and lighting.
Raccoon
Different task instructionsScene composition and interacting subjects.
GPT-5.5 35.8/100 Rank 45/53

Iceman Contributor 29.8/100 Rank 49/53

The judgment
GPT-5.5
The raccoon's masked face, bright hull and sweeping wake make the scene readable and lively. The dog is much less resolved: its head is ambiguous, overlapping brown forms obscure its anatomy, and its paws do not visibly grip the controls. Smooth shapes and cheerful colors provide appeal, but weak steering construction and limited depth keep the drawing uneven.
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.
Score breakdown
| Category | GPT-5.5 | Iceman Contributor |
|---|---|---|
| Task & likeness | 3.5/10 | 2.0/10 |
| Anatomy & construction | 3.0/10 | 3.0/10 |
| Space & placement | 4.5/10 | 3.0/10 |
| Light & reflections | 5.0/10 | 4.0/10 |
| Purposeful detail | 3.5/10 | 3.5/10 |
| Artistry & character | 3.0/10 | 2.5/10 |
| Materials & effects | 5.0/10 | 4.0/10 |
| Visual integrity | 3.0/10 | 2.5/10 |
Benchmark task
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.
Pelican
Different task instructionsSubject construction and spatial relationships.
GPT-5.5 60.0/100 Rank 36/53

Iceman Contributor 38.0/100 Rank 48/53

The judgment
GPT-5.5
The oversized bill, bright bicycle and sunset create an appealing, recognizable cartoon. Riding mechanics are less convincing: the wing has no clear steering contact, leg attachments are uneven, and feet do not visibly engage pedals. A dark notch complicates the rear neck junction. Clean contours and orderly spokes provide polish, while simplified anatomy and lighting limit depth.
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.
Score breakdown
| Category | GPT-5.5 | Iceman Contributor |
|---|---|---|
| Task & likeness | 7.5/10 | 4.0/10 |
| Anatomy & construction | 4.5/10 | 3.5/10 |
| Space & placement | 6.5/10 | 3.5/10 |
| Light & reflections | 6.5/10 | 5.0/10 |
| Purposeful detail | 5.5/10 | 4.5/10 |
| Artistry & character | 5.0/10 | 3.5/10 |
| Materials & effects | 6.0/10 | 4.0/10 |
| Visual integrity | 7.5/10 | 3.0/10 |
Benchmark task
A cycling pelican tests anatomy, riding posture and contact between the bird and the bicycle.