STEALTHMARK · HEAD TO HEAD

All comparisons ↗

Kimi K3.1 Pro vs MISSINGNO.

Kimi K3.1 Pro leads MISSINGNO. by 18.0 points on StealthMark, 56.7 to 38.7. It leads on all 7 benchmarks with results for both. Kimi K3.1 Pro scores higher on Newton's Mirror, with its largest category advantage in reflections.

See the difference ↘
All results ↗
Model guide ↗

Overall StealthMark

56.7/100Overall rank 11/53
38.7/100Overall rank 36/53

General Intelligence

53.9/100
35.3/100

Visual Intelligence

62.0/100
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

BENCHMARK BY BENCHMARK

Where each model leads

  • Kimi K3.1 Pro
  • MISSINGNO.
  • Other models
  • Median

DATASHEET

Specs and pricing

Kimi K3.1 Pro scores higher on StealthMark. MISSINGNO. runs 7.2× faster in our speed test.

  • Kimi K3.1 Pro
  • MISSINGNO.
  • Other models
  • Median
PricePer 1M output tokens, input below
Kimi K3.1 Pro: $10$2 inputMISSINGNO.: No list price
Context windowTokens per request, max output below
Kimi K3.1 Pro: 1M1M max outputMISSINGNO.: Not published
Output speedTokens per second, our measurement
Kimi K3.1 Pro: 117tokens/sMISSINGNO.: 8467.2× fastertokens/s
SizeTotal and active parameters
Kimi K3.1 Pro: 2.8T104B activeEstimatedMISSINGNO.: Not disclosed
Developer
Moonshot AINot published
Released
23 Oct 2026Not published
Origin
ChinaNot published
Input → output
Text, image, video → textNot published
Architecture
Post-trained version of Kimi K3, a Mixture-of-Experts modelNot published

Full datasheets, every price and sourceKimi K3.1 Pro ↗

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.

Kimi K3.1 Pro 61.1/100Rank 10/47

Survived 1 of 3
Foresight: complete playing field
Level 315 ptsTurn 20 / 20

Points per level

LevelKimi K3.1 ProMISSINGNO.
Level 1Second Thoughts
15 ptsOut of lives
No run
Level 2Pressure Pot
12 ptsOut of lives
No run
Level 3Hide or Flight
15 ptsSurvived
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.

Kimi K3.1 Pro 81.8/100Rank 8/48

Cleared 5 of 5
Latch: complete playing field
Level 519.8 ptsTurn 31 / 40

Points per level

LevelKimi K3.1 ProMISSINGNO.
Level 1Hold the door
5.2 ptsCleared
No run
Level 2Crossfeed
9.8 ptsCleared
No run
Level 3Relay vault
19.2 ptsCleared
No run
Level 4Passing bay
18.2 ptsClearedFinished early · 3 beacons left
No run
Level 5Second thoughts
19.8 ptsCleared
No run

Newton's Mirror

Same task instructions

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

The judgment

Kimi K3.1 Pro

The settled sphere, separate airborne black paint and crimson-before-cyan interaction are supported, with a modest crimson travel overshoot. A shared downward framing displacement remains after accounting for the square canvas. The principal limitation is the reflection system: sparse sphere copies and generic curved bands omit most of the ordered mirror-room structure. Materials receive a small upward revision because bounded bright images and dark bands visibly establish some polish, while soft shading and bulky paint remain separate weaknesses.

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

CategoryKimi K3.1 ProMISSINGNO.
State at 600 ms23.5/2519.0/25
Camera and placement10.5/157.0/15
Reflections26.0/12012.0/120
Materials and scale7.0/105.5/10
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

Kimi K3.1 Pro

The transformed reflection, attentive pose and constellation anatomy clearly communicate introspection. Purposeful fine details enrich a coherent composition. Tubular limbs, crowded lower-body overlaps, shallow depth and limited cast lighting keep the overall execution within the competent range.

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

CategoryKimi K3.1 ProMISSINGNO.
Task & likeness8.0/105.5/10
Anatomy & construction5.5/104.5/10
Space & placement6.5/106.0/10
Light & reflections6.5/105.5/10
Purposeful detail7.5/104.5/10
Artistry & character7.0/104.5/10
Materials & effects7.0/104.0/10
Visual integrity7.0/106.0/10

Benchmark task

Kimi K3.1 Pro

An imagined creature encounters its reflection. The scene tests original character design, visual self-interpretation and the relationship between a subject and its reflected image.

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

Kimi K3.1 Pro

A coherent, recognizable interpretation with controlled color and readable landscape layers. Replication is limited by the frontal seated construction, elongated facial proportions and oversized, weakly articulated hands. Smooth shading supplies some volume but little of the reference's subtle expression, fabric structure or atmospheric transitions.

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

CategoryKimi K3.1 ProMISSINGNO.
Task & likeness5.0/101.5/10
Anatomy & construction5.0/102.5/10
Space & placement5.5/102.5/10
Light & reflections6.0/103.0/10
Purposeful detail5.5/102.0/10
Artistry & character6.0/103.5/10
Materials & effects5.0/102.0/10
Visual integrity6.5/106.0/10

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

Kimi K3.1 Pro

A coherent, playful beach illustration with readable animals, an organized composition and an aligned sunset reflection. Connected silhouettes, sand texture and atmospheric effects demonstrate controlled execution. Simplified joints, flattened foreground viewpoints and inconsistent shadows limit anatomical and spatial credibility.

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

CategoryKimi K3.1 ProMISSINGNO.
Task & likeness8.5/107.0/10
Anatomy & construction5.5/104.0/10
Space & placement5.5/106.5/10
Light & reflections6.5/105.0/10
Purposeful detail6.5/103.0/10
Artistry & character5.5/103.0/10
Materials & effects6.5/105.0/10
Visual integrity7.5/103.5/10

Benchmark task

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

Ground Truth

Same task instructions

Physical reasoning, light and visual reconstruction.

The judgment

Kimi K3.1 Pro

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

Kimi K3.1 Pro

The additional comparisons support retaining the assessment. Readable steering, shaped animal contours and purposeful details coexist with simplified joints, a frontal passenger whose seated weight is weakly conveyed, and limited physical lighting. The angled craft establishes more depth than the riding pose resolves.

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

CategoryKimi K3.1 ProMISSINGNO.
Task & likeness7.0/108.0/10
Anatomy & construction5.5/104.5/10
Space & placement6.0/105.5/10
Light & reflections5.5/105.0/10
Purposeful detail7.0/106.0/10
Artistry & character6.0/105.0/10
Materials & effects6.0/104.5/10
Visual integrity7.0/107.0/10

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

Kimi K3.1 Pro

A characterful coastal illustration with controlled contours and varied feather, accessory and bicycle detail. Layered scenery and subtle shading enrich the presentation. Soft leg articulation, unresolved riding contacts, shallow depth and generalized lighting limit physical precision.

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

CategoryKimi K3.1 ProMISSINGNO.
Task & likeness8.5/107.0/10
Anatomy & construction7.5/105.5/10
Space & placement6.5/106.0/10
Light & reflections6.5/105.0/10
Purposeful detail7.5/105.5/10
Artistry & character7.5/106.0/10
Materials & effects6.5/104.5/10
Visual integrity7.5/106.5/10

Benchmark task

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