Gemini 2.5 Pro vs. Claude 3.7 Sonnet: Coding Comparison
1–10 of 336 posts
Re: Gemini 2.5 Pro vs. Claude 3.7 Sonnet: Coding Comparison
#2TL;DR
If you want to jump straight to the conclusion, I’d say go for Gemini 2.5 Pro, it’s better at coding, has one million in context window as compared to Claude’s 200k, and you can get it for free (a big plus). However, Claude’s 3.7 Sonnet is not that far behind. Though at this point there’s no point using it over Gemini 2.5 Pro.
Re: Gemini 2.5 Pro vs. Claude 3.7 Sonnet: Coding Comparison
#3TL;DR If you want to jump straight to the conclusion, I’d say go for Gemini 2.5 Pro, it’s better at coding, has one million in context window as compared to Claude’s 200k, and you can get it for free (a big plus). However, Claude’s 3.7 Sonnet is not that far behind. Though at this point there’s no point using it over Gemini 2.5 Pro.
How are you getting gemini 2.5 pro for free?
In the gemini iOS app the only available models are currently 2.0 flash and 2.0 flash thinking.
Re: Gemini 2.5 Pro vs. Claude 3.7 Sonnet: Coding Comparison
#4TL;DR If you want to jump straight to the conclusion, I’d say go for Gemini 2.5 Pro, it’s better at coding, has one million in context window as compared to Claude’s 200k, and you can get it for free (a big plus). However, Claude’s 3.7 Sonnet is not that far behind. Though at this point there’s no point using it over Gemini 2.5 Pro.
Not sure what happened with Claude 3.7, but 3.5 is way better in all things day to day. 3.7 felt like a major step back especially when it comes to coding even though this was highlighted as one aspect they improved upon. 500k window will soon be released for Claude. Not sure much it will improve anything though.
Re: Gemini 2.5 Pro vs. Claude 3.7 Sonnet: Coding Comparison
#5From my use case, the Gemini 2.5 is terrible. I have a complex Cython code in a single file (1500 lines) for a Sequence Labeling. Claude and o3 are very good in improving this code and following the commands. The Gemini always try to do unrelated changes. For example, I asked, separately, for small changes such as remove this unused function, or cache the arrays indexes. Every time it completely refactored the code and was obsessed with removing the gil. The output code is always broken, because removing the gil is not easy.
Re: Gemini 2.5 Pro vs. Claude 3.7 Sonnet: Coding Comparison
#6TL;DR If you want to jump straight to the conclusion, I’d say go for Gemini 2.5 Pro, it’s better at coding, has one million in context window as compared to Claude’s 200k, and you can get it for free (a big plus). However, Claude’s 3.7 Sonnet is not that far behind. Though at this point there’s no point using it over Gemini 2.5 Pro.
How are you getting gemini 2.5 pro for free? In the gemini iOS app the only available models are currently 2.0 flash and 2.0 flash thinking.
Re: Gemini 2.5 Pro vs. Claude 3.7 Sonnet: Coding Comparison
#7TL;DR If you want to jump straight to the conclusion, I’d say go for Gemini 2.5 Pro, it’s better at coding, has one million in context window as compared to Claude’s 200k, and you can get it for free (a big plus). However, Claude’s 3.7 Sonnet is not that far behind. Though at this point there’s no point using it over Gemini 2.5 Pro.
If there'd just be an alternative to claude code...
Re: Gemini 2.5 Pro vs. Claude 3.7 Sonnet: Coding Comparison
#8TL;DR If you want to jump straight to the conclusion, I’d say go for Gemini 2.5 Pro, it’s better at coding, has one million in context window as compared to Claude’s 200k, and you can get it for free (a big plus). However, Claude’s 3.7 Sonnet is not that far behind. Though at this point there’s no point using it over Gemini 2.5 Pro.
> has one million in context window
Is this effective context window or just the absolute limit? A lot of the models that claim to support very large context windows cannot actually successfully do the typical "needle in a haystack" test, but I'm guessing there are published results somewhere demonstrating Gemini 2.5 Pro can actually find the needle?
Re: Gemini 2.5 Pro vs. Claude 3.7 Sonnet: Coding Comparison
#9Is there a less biased discussion?
The OP link is a thinly veiled and biased advert for something called composio and really a biased and overly flowery view of Gemini 2.5 pro.
Example:
“Everyone’s talking about this model on Twitter (X) and YouTube. It’s trending everywhere, like seriously. The first model from Google to receive such fanfare.
And it is #1 in the LMArena just like that. But what does this mean? It means that this model is killing all the other models in coding, math, Science, Image understanding, and other areas.”
Re: Gemini 2.5 Pro vs. Claude 3.7 Sonnet: Coding Comparison
#10TL;DR If you want to jump straight to the conclusion, I’d say go for Gemini 2.5 Pro, it’s better at coding, has one million in context window as compared to Claude’s 200k, and you can get it for free (a big plus). However, Claude’s 3.7 Sonnet is not that far behind. Though at this point there’s no point using it over Gemini 2.5 Pro.
How are you getting gemini 2.5 pro for free? In the gemini iOS app the only available models are currently 2.0 flash and 2.0 flash thinking.
> How are you getting gemini 2.5 pro for free?
I think the "AI Premium" plan of Google One includes access to all the models, including the latest ones (at least that's what it says for me in Spain): https://one.google.com/plans