Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Gemini-2.5-pro-preview-06-05

deepmind.google

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 237 posts

Re: Gemini-2.5-pro-preview-06-05

#81

Post by jadbox »

chollida1 wrote: post #64

I'd start to worry about OpenAI, from a valuation standpoint. The company has some serious competition now and is arguably no longer the leader. its going to be interesting to see how easily they can raise more money. Their valuation is already in the $300B range. How much larger can it get given their relatively paltry revenue at the moment and increasingly rising costs for hardware and electricity. If the next gene…

Currently I only find OpenAI to be clearly better for image generation: like illustrations, comics, or photo editing for home project ideation.

Re: Gemini-2.5-pro-preview-06-05

#82

Post by pqdbr »

joshmlewis wrote: post #42
johnfn wrote: post #12

Impressive seeing Google notch up another ~25 ELO on lmarena, on top of the previous #1, which was also Gemini! That being said, I'm starting to doubt the leaderboards as an accurate representation of model ability. While I do think Gemini is a good model, having used both Gemini and Claude Opus 4 extensively in the last couple of weeks I think Opus is in another league entirely. I've been dealing with a number of gn…

o3 is still my favorite over even Opus 4 in most cases. I've spent hundreds of dollars on AI code gen tools in the last month alone and my ranking is: 1. o3 - it's just really damn good at nuance, getting to the core of the goal, and writing the closest thing to quality production level code. The only negative is it's cutoff window and cost, especially with it's love of tools. That's not usually a big deal for the Ra…

How do you choose which model to use with Claude Code?

Re: Gemini-2.5-pro-preview-06-05

#84

Post by dragonwriter »

Workaccount2 wrote: post #80
joshmlewis wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, exactly. For everyone who might not know, the chat apps add lots of complex system prompting to handle and shape personality, tone, general usability, etc. IDE's also do this (with Claude Code being one of the ones that are closest to "bare" model that you can get) but at they are at least guiding it's behavior to be really good at coding tasks. Another reason is using the Agent feature that IDE's have had for…

IDE's are intimidating to non-tech people. I'm surprised there isn't a VibeIDE yet that is purpose build to make it possible for your grandmother to execute code output by an LLM.

> I'm surprised there isn't a VibeIDE yet that is purpose build to make it possible for your grandmother to execute code output by an LLM.

The major LLM chat interfaces often have code execution built in, so there kind of is, it just doesn't look like what an SWE thinks of as an IDE.

Re: Gemini-2.5-pro-preview-06-05

#85

Post by joshmlewis »

pqdbr wrote: post #82
joshmlewis wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

o3 is still my favorite over even Opus 4 in most cases. I've spent hundreds of dollars on AI code gen tools in the last month alone and my ranking is: 1. o3 - it's just really damn good at nuance, getting to the core of the goal, and writing the closest thing to quality production level code. The only negative is it's cutoff window and cost, especially with it's love of tools. That's not usually a big deal for the Ra…

How do you choose which model to use with Claude Code?

I have the Max $200 plan so I set it to Opus until it limits me to Sonnet 4 which has only happened in two out of a few dozen sessions so far. My rule of thumb in Cursor is it's worth paying for the Max reasoning models for pretty much every request unless it's stupid simple because it produces the best code each time without any funny business you get with cheaper models.

Re: Gemini-2.5-pro-preview-06-05

#86

Post by joshmlewis »

drawnwren wrote: post #61
joshmlewis wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What languages do you use it with and IDE? I use it in Cursor mainly with Max reasoning on. I spent around $300 on token based usage for o3 alone in May still only accepting around 33% of suggestions though. I made a post on X about this the other day but I expect that amount of rejections will go down significantly by the end of this year at the rate things are going.

Very strange. I find reasoning has very narrow usefulness for me. It's great to get a project in context or to get oriented in the conversation, but on long conversations I find reasoning starts to add way too much extraneous stuff and get distracted from the task at hand. I think my coding model ranking is something like Claude Code > Claude 4 raw > Gemini > big gap > o4-mini > o3

Claude Code isn't a model in itself. By default it routes some to Opus 4 or Sonnet 4 but mostly Sonnet 4 unless you explicitly set it.

Re: Gemini-2.5-pro-preview-06-05

#87

Post by joshmlewis »

Workaccount2 wrote: post #80
joshmlewis wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, exactly. For everyone who might not know, the chat apps add lots of complex system prompting to handle and shape personality, tone, general usability, etc. IDE's also do this (with Claude Code being one of the ones that are closest to "bare" model that you can get) but at they are at least guiding it's behavior to be really good at coding tasks. Another reason is using the Agent feature that IDE's have had for…

IDE's are intimidating to non-tech people. I'm surprised there isn't a VibeIDE yet that is purpose build to make it possible for your grandmother to execute code output by an LLM.

I have not used them but I feel like there are tools like Replit, Lovable, etc that are for that audience. I totally agree IDE's are intimidating for non-technical people though. Claude Code is pretty cool in that way where it's one command to install and pretty easy to get started with.

Re: Gemini-2.5-pro-preview-06-05

#88

Post by 93po »

wiradikusuma wrote: post #56

I have two issues with Gemini that I don't experience with Claude: 1. It RENAMES VARIABLE NAMES even in places where I don't tell it to change (I pass them just as context). and 2. Sometimes it's missing closing square brackets. Sure I'm a lazy bum, I call the variable "json" instead of "jsonStringForX", but it's contextual (within a closure or function), and I appreciate the feedback, but it makes reviewing the chan…

i've noticed with ChatGPT is will 100% ignore certain instructions and I wonder if it's just an LLM thing. For example, I can scream and yell in caps at ChatGPT to not use em or en dashes and if anything it makes it use them even more. I've literally never once made it successfully not use them, even when it ignored it the first time, and my follow up is "output the same thing again but NO EM or EN DASHES!"

i've not tested this thoroughly, it's just my ancedotal experience over like a dozen attempts.

Re: Gemini-2.5-pro-preview-06-05

#89

Post by abraxas »

3abiton wrote: post #55
abraxas wrote: post #32

I found all the previous Gemini models somewhat inferior even compared to Claude 3.7 Sonnet (and much worse than 4) as my coding assistants. I'm keeping an open mind but also not rushing to try this one until some evaluations roll in. I'm actually baffled that the internet at large seems to be very pumped about Gemini but it's not reflective of my personal experience. Not to be that tinfoil hat guy but I smell at lea…

> I found all the previous Gemini models somewhat inferior even compared to Claude 3.7 Sonnet (and much worse than 4) as my coding assistants. What are your usecases? Really not my experience, Claude disappoints in Data Science and complex ETL requests in python. O3 on the other hand really is phenomenal.

Backend python code, postgres database. Front end: Reeact/NextJS. Very common stack in 2025. Using LLMs in assist mode (not as agents) for enhancing the existing code base that weighs in under 1MM LoC. So not a greenfield project anymore but not a huge amount of legacy cruft either.

Re: Gemini-2.5-pro-preview-06-05

#90

Post by AISnakeOil »

laweijfmvo wrote: post #28
pelorat wrote: post #18

Why not call it Gemini 2.6?

because the plethora of models and versions is getting ridiculous, and for anyone who's not following LLM news daily, you have no clue what to use. There was never a "Google Search 2.6.4 04-13". You just went to google.com and searched.

These api models are for developers. Gemini is for consumers.
Post reply on HN