> A small rock would have a lot less air resistance than a person, and those suits are designed to increase air resistance. So it might end up with a higher terminal velocity and fall slightly faster.
This is a bit more complicated than it appears at first glance. Other things being equal, a 3D object's mass increases as the cube of a single dimension's increase, but its surface area increases only as the square. Therefore a smaller object's atmospheric terminal velocity can be expected to less than that for a large one. This is why many kinds of small animals can fall great distances through the atmosphere and land unharmed.
(Until objects approach terminal velocity, they all fall with the same profile. Only when approaching terminal velocity do their speeds change.)
On the other hand, a typical rock (non-metallic) has 3.5 times the density of a human, so that argues in favor of a greater terminal velocity.
A full analysis would need to take into account the human's flight suit, which turns vertical kinetic energy into horizontal kinetic energy, and the rock's size, shape and composition.
But without any of this and a priori, the idea of a rock flying past a human, as in the video, is perfectly reasonable.
One more thing. The picture of the rock passing by the human is actually most likely a person flying horizontally past a rock that's dropping vertically.