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

Gemini 3.5 Flash

blog.google

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 692 posts

Re: Gemini 3.5 Flash

#111

Post by SXX »

Manuel_D wrote: post #82
Fishkins wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The boat itself rocks, but do you see the background changing to indicate the boat is progressing through the environment? I only see that in the 3.1 Pro example. I believe that's what the OP meant.

I think this illustrates the problem with OP's prompt. If the goal is specifically to implement a scrolling background, this should have been in the prompt.

Yup. My bad. It was just first idea that come to my mind since I enjoy visually compare each new release with unique prompts.

Re: Gemini 3.5 Flash

#112

Post by droidjj »

saberience wrote: post #73
WarmWash wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People complain about them incessantly, but I can almost never get people to actually post receipts. Every provider allows sharing chats, and anyone can share a prompt that reliably produces hallucinations. More often than not, people are using images in responses that go awry. Which is fair, the models are sold as multi-modal, but image analyses is still at gpt-4.0 text-analyses levels. Also knowledge cutoff issues,…

I see hallucinations ALL the time. It's only obvious when you're prompting about a subject you know well. And when I say all the time, I mean it, and this is for Opus 4.7 Adaptive. I often have to say, please do searches and cite sources, as if it doesn't it will confidently give me wrong or outdated information. If you're often asking questions about a topic that's not in your specialist knowledge you won't notice t…

Hallucination is also much better controlled in the context of agentic coding because outputs can be validated by running the code (or linters/LSP). I almost never notice hallucinations when I’m coding with AI, but when using AI for legal work (my real job) it hallucinates constantly and perniciously because the hallucinations are subtle—e.g., making up a crucial fact about a real case.

Re: Gemini 3.5 Flash

#114

Post by fikama »

howdareme wrote: post #24
himata4113 wrote: post #9

Engineers at google have publically stated that the models are too big and are far from their potencial. Glad they're being proven right with every release. They continue to focus on smaller models while openai and anthropic are increasing compute requirements for their SOTA models.

Google’s pro models are almost certainly bigger than Openai’s lol

Why would that be? I am curious why do you think that.

Re: Gemini 3.5 Flash

#115

Post by Dinux »

himata4113 wrote: post #9

Engineers at google have publically stated that the models are too big and are far from their potencial. Glad they're being proven right with every release. They continue to focus on smaller models while openai and anthropic are increasing compute requirements for their SOTA models.

Source please cause i dont believe that for once second

Re: Gemini 3.5 Flash

#116

Post by 2001zhaozhao »

s3p wrote: post #65

Yikes. I think the concept of a 'flash' model is changing, no? Google used to market this as its lower-intelligence, faster, cheaper option. I appreciate that they are delivering on both of those, but personally I would appreciate if they could create an incremental knowledge improvement while holding price steady. Fortune 500 companies have to make their money I guess.

I think flash just means "fast" now

Re: Gemini 3.5 Flash

#117

Post by johaugum »

himata4113 wrote: post #46
wolttam wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It depends on the use-case. yes, 90% of cost is cache in agentic coding scenarios (actually 95% in my experience). But not when the model reasons for 200k+ tokens before answering a complex problem.

gemini models solve a problem in 80% less tokens so that's something to think about.

Source?

Re: Gemini 3.5 Flash

#118

Post by ilia-a »

GodelNumbering wrote: post #84

Per million input/output tokens: Gemini 2.5 flash: $0.30/$2.50 Gemini 3.0 flash preview: $0.50/$3.00 Gemini 3.5 flash: $1.50/$9.00 Interesting pricing direction. I don't think we have ever seen a 3x price increase for in the immediate next same-sized model (and lol @ 3 only ever getting a preview). 3.5 flash costs similar to Gemini 2.5 pro which was $1.25/$10

Yeah, it is a massive jump in price, hardly a "Flash" model anymore... I wonder if they'll release flash lite or something with a bit more affordable price point.

Re: Gemini 3.5 Flash

#119

Post by abirch »

ACCount37 wrote: post #26
maipen wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don’t let that fool yourself. Google will have SOTA models as big as or even bigger than their competitors. They are just refining their current models while they finish training the next generation. They will all come out at about the same time. Anthropic, OpenAi, Google, xAI

Anthropic has been sitting on Mythos for a while now. I guess they don't feel pressured to fuck it ship it until anyone else gets a 10T to work.

Anthropic can sell Mythos to Fortune 500 companies and bypass the average user. I'm not sure how much is hype but I see things like this https://blog.cloudflare.com/cyber-frontier-models/

Re: Gemini 3.5 Flash

#120

Post by simonw »

himata4113 wrote: post #12
asar wrote: post #8

$1.5/m input tokens $9/m output tokens 6x the price of 3.1 flash lite

I don't think input/output pricing matters, 90% of the cost is cache. $0.15 is pretty good, but still very expensive.

Gemini caching is confusing though:

  $0.15 / million tokens
  $1.00 / 1,000,000 tokens per hour (storage price)
I much prefer the OpenAI/DeepSeek way of pricing caching where you don't have to think about storage price at all - you pay for cached tokens if you reuse the same prefix within a (loosely defined) time period.
Post reply on HN