Iceman Contributor 3.2/100Rank 47/47

STEALTHMARK · HEAD TO HEAD
All comparisons ↗Muse Spark Open leads Iceman Contributor by 24.9 points on StealthMark, 44.1 to 19.2. It leads on all 9 benchmarks. Muse Spark Open 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
Muse Spark Open scores higher on StealthMark and runs 7.8× faster in our speed test.
Full datasheets, every price and sourceMuse Spark Open ↗
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 ↗


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.
Muse Spark Open
The airborne black blob and deformed paint support the broad contact sequence, although cyan attachment and wheel-directed transport remain partial. The sphere and black blob have substantial framing errors. The dominant limitation is the largely absent mirror system: faint wall circles and isolated highlights provide little evidence of recursive room geometry or curved nested reflections. Oversized compact paint features and diffuse material treatment further limit credit.
| Category | Iceman Contributor | Muse Spark Open |
|---|---|---|
| State at 600 ms | 0.5/25 | 14.0/25 |
| Camera and placement | 2.5/15 | 6.0/15 |
| Reflections | 7.5/120 | 8.0/120 |
| Materials and scale | 3.0/10 | 3.5/10 |
| 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.


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.
Muse Spark Open
The rounded silhouette and asymmetric expression make an appealing baby elephant, supported by a quiet background and grounding shadow. The protective action remains difficult to read: forefeet cannot be confidently traced into a grip, and seed contact is crowded by fine lines. Controlled simple shapes provide charm, but limited anatomical clarity, shading and surface detail leave the execution uneven.
| Category | Iceman Contributor | Muse Spark Open |
|---|---|---|
| Task & likeness | 4.0/10 | 5.0/10 |
| Anatomy & construction | 3.0/10 | 4.5/10 |
| Space & placement | 4.0/10 | 6.0/10 |
| Light & reflections | 4.5/10 | 5.0/10 |
| Purposeful detail | 4.0/10 | 6.0/10 |
| Artistry & character | 4.5/10 | 5.0/10 |
| Materials & effects | 4.5/10 | 5.0/10 |
| Visual integrity | 4.0/10 | 6.5/10 |
Iceman Contributor
Character scenes test expression, anatomy, materials and coherent visual construction.
Muse Spark Open
A small elephant protecting a delicate seed tests expressive anatomy, physical contact and contrasting organic materials.
Precise visual recall and portrait reconstruction.


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.
Muse Spark Open
A recognizable, orderly interpretation with clean major contours, connected body forms and modest facial shading. Wide eyes, frontal symmetry and schematic hands limit likeness and expression. Layered scenery establishes basic depth, but shallow arm overlaps, flat clothing and sparse fine detail keep the execution basic and uneven.
| Category | Iceman Contributor | Muse Spark Open |
|---|---|---|
| Task & likeness | 1.5/10 | 3.0/10 |
| Anatomy & construction | 1.5/10 | 3.0/10 |
| Space & placement | 2.5/10 | 5.0/10 |
| Light & reflections | 2.0/10 | 4.5/10 |
| Purposeful detail | 2.0/10 | 4.0/10 |
| Artistry & character | 2.0/10 | 3.0/10 |
| Materials & effects | 2.0/10 | 4.0/10 |
| Visual integrity | 3.0/10 | 6.0/10 |
An SVG interpretation of the Mona Lisa tests facial likeness, anatomy and the composition of a familiar portrait.
Creativity, perspective and visual beauty.


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.
Muse Spark Open
A coherent sunset beach with readable activities, balanced framing and controlled colour transitions. Small accessories add interest, but schematic anatomy, limited surface detail, weak directional shadows and a geometric reflection constrain its finish. Most shapes and overlaps remain clean.
| Category | Iceman Contributor | Muse Spark Open |
|---|---|---|
| Task & likeness | 7.0/10 | 8.0/10 |
| Anatomy & construction | 3.5/10 | 6.0/10 |
| Space & placement | 6.0/10 | 6.5/10 |
| Light & reflections | 4.0/10 | 5.5/10 |
| Purposeful detail | 5.5/10 | 6.5/10 |
| Artistry & character | 3.5/10 | 5.5/10 |
| Materials & effects | 4.5/10 | 6.0/10 |
| Visual integrity | 5.0/10 | 8.0/10 |
A busy shoreline at sunset tests scene composition, animal forms and the relationship between light and water reflections.
Physical reasoning, light and visual reconstruction.


Iceman Contributor
This benchmark has not been assessed yet.
Muse Spark Open
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.


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.
Muse Spark Open
Expressive faces, distinct accessories and clean color separation make the scene appealing and recognizable. Character detail is stronger than the functional construction: steering contact, limb overlaps and seating remain ambiguous. The readable hull and lively spray establish motion, while limited directional shading and simplified surfaces constrain depth and physical coherence.
| Category | Iceman Contributor | Muse Spark Open |
|---|---|---|
| Task & likeness | 2.0/10 | 4.0/10 |
| Anatomy & construction | 3.0/10 | 3.0/10 |
| Space & placement | 3.0/10 | 6.0/10 |
| Light & reflections | 4.0/10 | 4.5/10 |
| Purposeful detail | 3.5/10 | 7.0/10 |
| Artistry & character | 2.5/10 | 3.5/10 |
| Materials & effects | 4.0/10 | 5.0/10 |
| Visual integrity | 2.5/10 | 5.0/10 |
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.


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.
Muse Spark Open
A controlled, appealing cartoon with a recognizable pelican, expressive face and clean curved forms. Feather lines, spokes and bill shading provide useful complexity. Aligned wheels and a ground shadow establish placement, but uncertain pedal contacts and obscured mechanical connections weaken support and riding action. Lighting remains loosely coordinated with the sun.
| Category | Iceman Contributor | Muse Spark Open |
|---|---|---|
| Task & likeness | 4.0/10 | 7.5/10 |
| Anatomy & construction | 3.5/10 | 5.0/10 |
| Space & placement | 3.5/10 | 6.0/10 |
| Light & reflections | 5.0/10 | 5.0/10 |
| Purposeful detail | 4.5/10 | 6.5/10 |
| Artistry & character | 3.5/10 | 5.5/10 |
| Materials & effects | 4.0/10 | 6.0/10 |
| Visual integrity | 3.0/10 | 7.5/10 |
A cycling pelican tests anatomy, riding posture and contact between the bird and the bicycle.