STEALTHMARK · HEAD TO HEAD

All comparisons ↗

Iceman Contributor vs MISSINGNO.

MISSINGNO. leads Iceman Contributor by 19.5 points on StealthMark, 38.7 to 19.2. It leads on 6 of the 7 benchmarks with results for both and Iceman Contributor on 1. MISSINGNO. scores higher on Newton's Mirror, with its largest category advantage in state at 600 ms.

See the difference ↘
Model guide ↗
Model guide ↗

Overall StealthMark

19.2/100Overall rank 47/53
38.7/100Overall rank 36/53

General Intelligence

11.7/100
35.3/100

Visual Intelligence

31.0/100
42.4/100

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

  • MISSINGNO.Multi-step reasoning not measured

Open or local

BENCHMARK BY BENCHMARK

Where each model leads

  • Iceman Contributor
  • MISSINGNO.
  • Other models
  • Median

DATASHEET

Specs and pricing

MISSINGNO. scores higher on StealthMark and runs 18× faster in our speed test.

  • Iceman Contributor
  • MISSINGNO.
  • Other models
  • Median
Output speedTokens per second, our measurement
Iceman Contributor: 46tokens/sMISSINGNO.: 84618× fastertokens/s

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

LevelIceman ContributorMISSINGNO.
Level 1Second Thoughts
0 ptsOut of lives
No run
Level 2Pressure Pot
3 ptsOut of lives
No run
Level 3Hide or Flight
1 ptsOut of lives
No run

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

LevelIceman ContributorMISSINGNO.
Level 1Hold the door
5.2 ptsCleared
No run
Level 2Crossfeed
2.8 ptsFinished early
No run
Level 3Relay vault
2.2 ptsFinished early
No run
Level 4Passing bay
4 ptsFinished early
No run
Level 5Second thoughts
5 ptsFinished early
No run

Newton's Mirror

Same task instructions

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

The judgment

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.

MISSINGNO.

The centered sphere, separate airborne black blob and cyan-above-crimson ordering provide limited valid structure. The colored beads do not establish the required impact and transport histories. One dim floor image supports a small part of the optical system, while the defining wall repetitions, nested sphere imagery and emitter mappings are missing. Rounded volume and some gloss earn material credit, tempered by soft surface appearance and excessive paint-bead scale.

Score breakdown

CategoryIceman ContributorMISSINGNO.
State at 600 ms0.5/2519.0/25
Camera and placement2.5/157.0/15
Reflections7.5/12012.0/120
Materials and scale3.0/105.5/10
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

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.

MISSINGNO.

An appealing purple character with a readable pleased expression and raised-moustache joke. Smooth shading and clean contours support the simple design, but indistinct mitten grips, minimally textured curls and an uncompressed strap weaken the requested physical interaction. The jelly suggests gloss more convincingly than translucency.

Score breakdown

CategoryIceman ContributorMISSINGNO.
Task & likeness4.0/105.5/10
Anatomy & construction3.0/104.5/10
Space & placement4.0/106.0/10
Light & reflections4.5/105.5/10
Purposeful detail4.0/104.5/10
Artistry & character4.5/104.5/10
Materials & effects4.5/104.0/10
Visual integrity4.0/106.0/10

Benchmark task

Iceman Contributor

Character scenes test expression, anatomy, materials and coherent visual construction.

MISSINGNO.

A glossy purple jelly struggles with an oversized fake moustache at a playful checkpoint. The scene tests comic expression, physical contact and the appearance of a soft translucent body.

Mona Lisa

Different task instructions

Precise visual recall and portrait reconstruction.

The judgment

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.

MISSINGNO.

Clean contours, connected body forms and gentle gradients support a basic, coherent portrait. Likeness remains weak: the face dominates the body, the seated angle is lost, and crossed hands become dark lobes without traceable wrists or fingers. Readable facial details add some drawing complexity, but clothing, landscape and material treatment remain sparse.

Score breakdown

CategoryIceman ContributorMISSINGNO.
Task & likeness1.5/101.5/10
Anatomy & construction1.5/102.5/10
Space & placement2.5/102.5/10
Light & reflections2.0/103.0/10
Purposeful detail2.0/102.0/10
Artistry & character2.0/103.5/10
Materials & effects2.0/102.0/10
Visual integrity3.0/106.0/10

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

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.

MISSINGNO.

A coherent sunset beach with clear requested subjects, balanced framing and clean shapes. The aligned solar reflection and warm gradients establish atmosphere. Primitive animal construction, ambiguous furniture, sparse depth cues and minimally developed surfaces limit its drawing complexity and physical richness.

Score breakdown

CategoryIceman ContributorMISSINGNO.
Task & likeness7.0/107.0/10
Anatomy & construction3.5/104.0/10
Space & placement6.0/106.5/10
Light & reflections4.0/105.0/10
Purposeful detail5.5/103.0/10
Artistry & character3.5/103.0/10
Materials & effects4.5/105.0/10
Visual integrity5.0/103.5/10

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

Iceman Contributor

This benchmark has not been assessed yet.

MISSINGNO.

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

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.

MISSINGNO.

The requested interaction reads clearly through recognizable animals, expressive faces and a coherent hull-water relationship. Clean curves and readable accessories give the cartoon polish. Partly unresolved grips and supporting contacts limit physical construction; modest shape complexity, weak directional lighting and schematic water constrain its finish.

Score breakdown

CategoryIceman ContributorMISSINGNO.
Task & likeness2.0/108.0/10
Anatomy & construction3.0/104.5/10
Space & placement3.0/105.5/10
Light & reflections4.0/105.0/10
Purposeful detail3.5/106.0/10
Artistry & character2.5/105.0/10
Materials & effects4.0/104.5/10
Visual integrity2.5/107.0/10

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

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.

MISSINGNO.

A coherent, cheerful illustration with recognizable pelican features, balanced composition, clean contours and useful small details. Its controlled curves and layered wheels demonstrate competent drawing skill. Ambiguous pedal and steering contacts, sparse drivetrain construction and weak directional lighting limit the riding mechanics and finish.

Score breakdown

CategoryIceman ContributorMISSINGNO.
Task & likeness4.0/107.0/10
Anatomy & construction3.5/105.5/10
Space & placement3.5/106.0/10
Light & reflections5.0/105.0/10
Purposeful detail4.5/105.5/10
Artistry & character3.5/106.0/10
Materials & effects4.0/104.5/10
Visual integrity3.0/106.5/10

Benchmark task

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