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 ↘
All results ↗
Model guide ↗

Overall StealthMark

31.3/100Overall rank 43/53
19.2/100Overall rank 47/53

General Intelligence

26.8/100
11.7/100

Visual Intelligence

36.3/100
31.0/100

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

Open or local

BENCHMARK BY BENCHMARK

Where each model leads

  • GPT-5.5
  • Iceman Contributor
  • Other models
  • Median

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
PricePer 1M output tokens, input below
GPT-5.5: $30$5 inputIceman Contributor: No list price
Context windowTokens per request, max output below
GPT-5.5: 1.05M128K max outputIceman Contributor: Not published
Output speedTokens per second, our measurement
GPT-5.5: 1934.2× fastertokens/sIceman Contributor: 46tokens/s
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 ↗

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.

Iceman Contributor 3.2/100Rank 47/47

Survived 0 of 3
Foresight: complete playing field
Level 31 ptsTurn 7 / 20

Points per level

LevelGPT-5.5Iceman Contributor
Level 1Second Thoughts
No run
0 ptsOut of lives
Level 2Pressure Pot
No run
3 ptsOut of lives
Level 3Hide or Flight
No run
1 ptsOut of lives

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.

Iceman Contributor 3.6/100Rank 44/48

Cleared 1 of 5
Latch: complete playing field
Level 55 ptsTurn 25 / 40

Points per level

LevelGPT-5.5Iceman Contributor
Level 1Hold the door
No run
5.2 ptsCleared
Level 2Crossfeed
No run
2.8 ptsFinished early
Level 3Relay vault
No run
2.2 ptsFinished early
Level 4Passing bay
No run
4 ptsFinished early
Level 5Second thoughts
No run
5 ptsFinished early

Newton's Mirror

Same task instructions

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

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

CategoryGPT-5.5Iceman Contributor
State at 600 ms15.0/250.5/25
Camera and placement6.0/152.5/15
Reflections5.0/1207.5/120
Materials and scale6.0/103.0/10
Floor-damage reward0.0/100.0/10

Benchmark task

A spinning metal sphere and paint in a mirrored room test physical reasoning, perspective and consistency across repeated reflections.

Selfie

Different task instructions

Visual construction and creative interpretation.

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

CategoryGPT-5.5Iceman Contributor
Task & likeness3.0/104.0/10
Anatomy & construction3.0/103.0/10
Space & placement5.0/104.0/10
Light & reflections5.0/104.5/10
Purposeful detail4.5/104.0/10
Artistry & character4.0/104.5/10
Materials & effects4.5/104.5/10
Visual integrity7.0/104.0/10

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 instructions

Precise visual recall and portrait reconstruction.

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

CategoryGPT-5.5Iceman Contributor
Task & likeness1.5/101.5/10
Anatomy & construction1.5/101.5/10
Space & placement1.5/102.5/10
Light & reflections2.0/102.0/10
Purposeful detail2.5/102.0/10
Artistry & character1.5/102.0/10
Materials & effects2.0/102.0/10
Visual integrity1.5/103.0/10

Benchmark task

An SVG interpretation of the Mona Lisa tests facial likeness, anatomy and the composition of a familiar portrait.

Beach

Different task instructions

Creativity, perspective and visual beauty.

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

CategoryGPT-5.5Iceman Contributor
Task & likeness7.0/107.0/10
Anatomy & construction2.5/103.5/10
Space & placement3.0/106.0/10
Light & reflections3.0/104.0/10
Purposeful detail3.0/105.5/10
Artistry & character3.0/103.5/10
Materials & effects3.0/104.5/10
Visual integrity3.5/105.0/10

Benchmark task

A busy shoreline at sunset tests scene composition, animal forms and the relationship between light and water reflections.

Ground Truth

Different task instructions

Physical reasoning, light and visual reconstruction.

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 instructions

Scene composition and interacting subjects.

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

CategoryGPT-5.5Iceman Contributor
Task & likeness3.5/102.0/10
Anatomy & construction3.0/103.0/10
Space & placement4.5/103.0/10
Light & reflections5.0/104.0/10
Purposeful detail3.5/103.5/10
Artistry & character3.0/102.5/10
Materials & effects5.0/104.0/10
Visual integrity3.0/102.5/10

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 instructions

Subject construction and spatial relationships.

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

CategoryGPT-5.5Iceman Contributor
Task & likeness7.5/104.0/10
Anatomy & construction4.5/103.5/10
Space & placement6.5/103.5/10
Light & reflections6.5/105.0/10
Purposeful detail5.5/104.5/10
Artistry & character5.0/103.5/10
Materials & effects6.0/104.0/10
Visual integrity7.5/103.0/10

Benchmark task

A cycling pelican tests anatomy, riding posture and contact between the bird and the bicycle.