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

Gemini 3

blog.google

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 1001 posts

Re: Gemini 3

#122

Post by spudlyo »

guluarte wrote: post #8

it is live in the api > gemini-3-pro-preview-ais-applets > gemini-3-pro-preview

Can confirm. I was able to access it using GPTel in Emacs using 'gemini-3-pro-preview' as the model name.

Re: Gemini 3

#123

Post by mikeortman »

Its available for me now in gemini.google.com.... but its failing so bad at accurate audio transcription.

Its transcribing the meeting but hallucinates badly... both in fast and thinking mode. Fast mode only transcribed about a fifth of the meeting before saying its done. Thinking mode completely changed the topic and made up ENTIRE conversations. Gemini 2.5 actually transcribed it decently, just occasional missteps when people talked over each other.

I'm concerned.

Re: Gemini 3

#124

Post by amelius »

srameshc wrote: post #112

I think I am in this AI fatigue phase. I am past all hype with models, tools and agents and back to problem and solution approach, sometimes code gen with AI , sometimes think and ask for a piece of code. But not offloading to AI and buying all the bs, waiting it to do magic with my codebase.

Yeah, at this point I want to see the failure modes. Show me at least as many cases where it breaks. Otherwise, I'll assume it's an advertisement and I'll skip to the next headline. I'm not going to waste my time on it anymore.

Re: Gemini 3

#126

Post by ofa0e »

thefourthchime wrote: post #103
prodigycorp wrote: post #22

I'm sure this is a very impressive model, but gemini-3-pro-preview is failing spectacularly at my fairly basic python benchmark. In fact, gemini-2.5-pro gets a lot closer (but is still wrong). For reference: gpt-5.1-thinking passes, gpt-5.1-instant fails, gpt-5-thinking fails, gpt-5-instant fails, sonnet-4.5 passes, opus-4.1 passes (lesser claude models fail). This is a reminder that benchmarks are meaningless – you…

I like to ask "Make a pacman game in a single html page". No model has ever gotten a decent game in one shot. My attempt with Gemini3 was no better than 2.5.

Your benchmarks should not involve IP.

Re: Gemini 3

#128

Post by fosterfriends »

__jl__ wrote: post #13

API pricing is up to $2/M for input and $12/M for output For comparison: Gemini 2.5 Pro was $1.25/M for input and $10/M for output Gemini 1.5 Pro was $1.25/M for input and $5/M for output

Thrilled to see the cost is competitive with Anthropic.

Re: Gemini 3

#129

Post by hobofan »

63stack wrote: post #94
recitedropper wrote: post #89

[flagged]

I noticed this as well, you are already downvoted into gray

And now it's flagged.

I think this is one of HNs biggest weaknesses. If you are a sufficiently large engineering organization with enough employees that pass the self-moderation karma thresholds, you can essentially strike down any significantly critical discussion.

Re: Gemini 3

#130

Post by ponyous »

giancarlostoro wrote: post #118
ponyous wrote: post #111

Just generated a bunch of 3D CAD models using Gemini 3.0 to see how it compares in spatial understanding and it's heaps better than anything currently out there - not only intelligence but also speed. Will run extended benchmarks later, let me know if you want to see actual data.

I'm not familiar enough with CAD what type of format is it?

It’s not a format, but in my mind it implies designs that are supposed to be functional as opposed to models that are meant for virtual games.

It generated a blender script that makes the model.

Post reply on HN