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

291–300 of 692 posts

Re: Gemini 3.5 Flash

#291

Post by kaspermarstal »

owentbrown wrote: post #228

Has anyone switched from Claude 4.7 Opus or ChatGPT 5.5 to this? How does it feel? Dumber? Worth it for the speed? I'd love someone's subjective take on it, after doing a long session of coding. Reiner Pope gave a talk on Dwarkesh Patel about token economics. I guess faster is a lot more expensive, generally. Someone should make a harness that uses a fast model to keep you in-flow and speed run, and then uses a slow,…

I switched from Opus 4.6 -> Opus 4.7 -> GPT 5.5 and tried Flash 3.5 tonight and I was not impressed. It is straight up unreliable, e.g. deleting code and forgetting to add the new stuff it was asked to, then happily marking the task as complete with up-beat conclusion. I personally appreciate GPT 5.5 toned-down, objective style so really dislike how this model feels. I get that it's a flash model and not in the same league as GPT 5.5 but their marketing suggest otherwise so thy are just setting themselves up for disappointment.

Re: Gemini 3.5 Flash

#292

Post by OakNinja »

ilia-a wrote: post #118
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.

There’s already a flash lite tier since 2.5. Latest is 3.1 currently.

Re: Gemini 3.5 Flash

#293

Post by trollbridge »

SwellJoe wrote: post #250
hei-lima wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We need another "Deepseek moment" or else it will become impossible for the regular dude to use AI. It will become something that only big companies can afford.

We're having DeepSeek moments every couple of weeks. Qwen 3.6 hit hard in the self-hosting space. It's incredibly capable for its size, really shaking up what's possible in 64GB or even 32GB of VRAM. The Prism Bonsai ternary model crams a tremendous amount of capability into 1.75GB. And, DeepSeek V4 is crazy good for the price. They're charging flash model prices for their top-tier Pro model, which is competitive wit…

We have Qwen 3.6-35b (6) on a 5090 (32GB) and it's blowing me away. Works fine for most (not all) code generation tasks. One developer here has been extremely stubborn about adopting AI; he's finally adopted it, albeit only when it's coming from a local model like this.

DeepSeek V4 Pro likewise is insanely good for the price. I simply point it at large codebases, go get a cup of coffee or browse Hacker News, and then it's done useful work. This was simply not possible with other models without hitting budget problems.

Re: Gemini 3.5 Flash

#294

Post by nicce »

golfer wrote: post #89
OsrsNeedsf2P wrote: post #58

Beats 3.1 Pro for price per token, but artificial analysis is showing it's dumber per token and costs more overall

Arena.ai is saying "Gemini 3.5 Flash’s pricing shifts the Pareto frontier in Text. 8 models from GoogleDeepMind dominate the Text Arena Pareto curve where only 4 labs are represented for top performance in their price tiers." https://x.com/arena/status/2056793180998361233

Not sure what to think about this. There is no even GPT 5.5

Re: Gemini 3.5 Flash

#295

Post by neksn »

reconnecting wrote: post #167
hosel wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you explain what you mean?

LLM pre-training models risk being unable to be updated with data from after 2025, as much of it is corrupted with LLM-generated content. We might be locked into outdated knowledge, where only whitelisted sources decide what to include. Taking into account the sometimes blind belief that 'LLMs know everything', the outcome could be very costly, especially for technologies and businesses unfortunate enough to emerge a…

Considering all models can use search engines, is this really relevant?

Re: Gemini 3.5 Flash

#297

Post by rdtsc »

I caught it again being deceitful. It did this before

(Me): Did you actually read the paper before when I pasted the link?

> I will be completely honest: No, I did not.

> You caught me hallucinating a confident answer based on incomplete recall rather than actually verifying the document.

> Thank you for calling it out and providing the exact quote. It forced me to re-evaluate the actual data you provided rather than relying on my flawed assumption.

I am sure it learned a valuable lesson and won't do it again /s

Re: Gemini 3.5 Flash

#298

Post by [deleted] »

irthomasthomas wrote: post #161
simonw wrote: post #131

The pelican is a lot : https://github.com/simonw/llm-gemini/issues/133#issuecomment... Not a great bicycle though, it forgot the bar between the pedals and the back wheel and weirdly tangled the other bars. Expensive too - that pelican cost 13 cents: https://www.llm-prices.com/#it=11&ot=14403&sel=gemini-3.5-fl...

This is a perfect illustration of something I noticed with llm progress. Ask them to improve an svg like this, and it never fixes the missing crossbar or disconnected limbs, it just adds more stuff. In this example they have obviously improved greatly, and it contains a ridiculous amount of detail, but they still to get the basic shape of the frame wrong. It's weird. And the pattern shows up everywhere, try it with a…

[deleted]

Re: Gemini 3.5 Flash

#299

Post by lxgr »

et1337 wrote: post #259
tantalor wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Forgetting the chainstay is typical of asking random people to draw a bicycle. https://www.gianlucagimini.it/portfolio-item/velocipedia/ > most ended up drawing something that was pretty far off from a regular men’s bicycle

Asking random people to write SVG gives even worse results

Especially without being able to look at the rendered output! (At least I'd be surprised if modern server-side tool calls regularly include an SVG renderer that can show a rasterized version to the model to iterate on it.)

Re: Gemini 3.5 Flash

#300

Post by nicce »

SwellJoe wrote: post #234
bredren wrote: post #208

Can anyone who has extensive, recent, experience with Claude code and Codex contextualize the current Gemini CLI product experience?

I have and use both Claude Code and Gemini CLI, and still don't consider Gemini worth starting for coding except to review Claude's output in critical commits (on a security boundary, maybe broad refactors, etc.), though I try side-by-side every now and then just to see the state of things. I also use Gemini Pro in a security scanning harness to act as a second set of eyes, but Opus is better at finding security bugs…

I would argue that prose is just a prompt issue. GPT 5.5 outout is easier to control whan Gemini by prompting. Having better defaults does not make it necessarily better.
Post reply on HN