Does Google believe people want fast models because they have some sort of evidence of that preference? Or are they no longer capable of delivering a Pro model?
Gemini 3.7 Flash
51–60 of 525 posts
Re: Gemini 3.7 Flash
#52They need to release benchmarks against Luna/Terra. Luna is much cheaper which feels like it undercuts the need for Flash. I've always considered the Flash series of models to be for low-cost, high-volume, mostly text-based use cases (e.g. summarization, parsing, formatting), emphasis on low-cost. [edit: ah, benchmarks here: https://blog.google/innovation-and-ai/models-and-research/ge... more of a Terra than Luna com…
They compared against 5.6-terra on the model card: https://deepmind.google/models/model-cards/gemini-3-7-flash/
Re: Gemini 3.7 Flash
#53At the discounted rates, upgrading from 3 Flash to 3.7 Flash is finally reasonable.
In my evals 3.6 Flash (pre price change) was usually a bit more token efficient than 3 Flash, so I‘m expecting same or even lower cost-per-task on 3.7.
Maybe a play by Google to deprecate 3 Flash soon.
Re: Gemini 3.7 Flash
#54Another failed 3.5 pro run branded as 3.7 flash. It's getting sad.
Small young start-ups have to be frugal.
Re: Gemini 3.7 Flash
#55> * For 3.6 and 3.7 Flash, introductory price expires on December 31, 2026. Starting January 1, 2027, $1.50/1M input tokens and $7.50/1M output tokens will apply. this is hilarious. it is not 2025 any more, by Jan 2027 there will be at least 3 newer generation of models (from other provider) released already. nobody would use flash 3.7 at that time. sure we used to cling to gemini models in the past, demanding 2.5 mo…
Maybe the business model is to break even on bleeding edge models while making money on the long tail of usage once systems are tuned for a specific model and running in production.
How can system be tuned for a specific model? Model is fungible, often one model strictly greater on both quality and price.
Re: Gemini 3.7 Flash
#56> What's new in Gemini 3.7 Flash [0] > Coding and agentic tasks: Significantly higher quality on real-world software engineering and agentic benchmarks, improving issue resolution and reducing failed agent loops. > Web development and stronger design parity: Generates higher-fidelity desktop and web application code directly from design mocks, with strong gains in design adherence and in auditing existing codebases a…
>Given this industry, I'd be hard pressed if 3.7 Flash was still in use by end of year, so why not make it the official pricing
It was probably to placate some kind of general internal pricing/revenue benchmark that doesn't account for new model releases. Politicians do shit like this incessantly and it reeks of bureaucracy.
Re: Gemini 3.7 Flash
#57How does it compare to Opus 5.0 and Fable 5 for coding? E.g. in Cursor or OpenCode?
Re: Gemini 3.7 Flash
#58Earlier quoted context omitted.
Maybe the business model is to break even on bleeding edge models while making money on the long tail of usage once systems are tuned for a specific model and running in production.
How can system be tuned for a specific model? Model is fungible, often one model strictly greater on both quality and price.
Models are not fungible, if you're building certain types of products on them.
Re: Gemini 3.7 Flash
#59Glad to see that the company with the most data is releasing the most amount of models. Some things do make sense
Re: Gemini 3.7 Flash
#60https://artificialanalysis.ai/models/gemini-3-7-flash The selling point for gemini continues to be speed and particularly end-to-end response time.
I've blown away by flash 3.6's speed while Opus chugs along for _hours_ on similar tasks. I've gotten into a opus designed -> gemini implemented -> opus reviewed dev cycle recently.