Were your IQ tests run on a 1:1 basis with a trained practitioner over the course of several hours? If not, they're not one of the actual formal IQ tests, but either some form of proxy or some random unrelated test that someone has slapped the label on.

This is why there's so much confusion about "how can the IQ test be considered studied and reliable, bah!" - because the ones that are properly performed are labour-intensive and require a lot of training - and this is why results are all over the place. It's just not the case that $RANDOM_YAHOO[1] on the internet knows more about the caveats around IQ tests that the professionals who apply and study them.

Disclaimer: have formally studied 'intelligence' (and cognition, perception etc) and been given a partial IQ test myself by a properly trained professional, which came with the caveat "the results can't be properly used, because you're familiar with the process, which confounds the results".

[1] I don't mean you, I just mean that this is a common complaint