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

Gemini 3.8 Flash and 3.8 Flash Cyber

blog.google

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

581–590 of 699 posts

Re: Gemini 3.8 Flash and 3.8 Flash Cyber

#581

Post by kar1181 »

heliosAtwork wrote: post #280
simonw wrote: post #200

The speed combined with the fact that this thing is really good at HTML JavaScript is pretty exciting. Here's what I got for 1.8 cents and 13 seconds from the prompt "make me a cool thing in html": https://gisthost.github.io/?6a77bc41a81718c6aaa10d4ab243c59f Transcript here (it was part of a chat): https://gist.github.com/simonw/b6149a49d327164d67d62c3d12992...

Focus on speed and being OK with temporarily being #3/4 in intelligence might be the counterintuitive approach which makes Google win long term (whether accidentally or strategically). Can't wait to try Gemini Pro later this year!

Yeah, anthropic's models, even opus, are so slow I constantly find myself wishing for something a little bit dumber but a lot faster as most of the work is mechanical. If you have a clever controller agent driving some slightly dumber workhorses you get a lot more done and the quality drop is neglible.

Re: Gemini 3.8 Flash and 3.8 Flash Cyber

#582

Post by mft_ »

kridsdale1 wrote: post #337
rahimnathwani wrote: post #256

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When you called the Gemini API, did you opt in to using search grounding: tools=[{"type": "google_search"}] I'm curious whether in fact you were getting answers from the model weights (which is what I had assumed) or whether your API calls were resulting in web search tool calls.

Google AI person here: Using grounding in Gemini is indeed backed by the same canonical data source for business information (like opening hours) as Google Maps. This stuff is available in its own API for a GCP fee, but we’ve built tooling to connect it to the Gemini agentic ecosystem as well.

So if I understand you correctly, Gemini has direct free access to the Google Maps API in a manner that others (people, LLMs) would need to sign up for API access and pay for?

Re: Gemini 3.8 Flash and 3.8 Flash Cyber

#583

Post by cromka »

watusername wrote: post #390
_aavaa_ wrote: post #366

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do they officially support you using your subscription in other harnesses?

No, and Google actively bans people for using their subscription from other harnesses via various proxies/gateways. To preempt certain replies, yes, I know you can pay API prices and use whatever harness you want.

But do they ban proxies that use CLI?

Re: Gemini 3.8 Flash and 3.8 Flash Cyber

#585

Post by imtringued »

pietz wrote: post #162
Squarex wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They are all much larger and more expensive models. Google does not have a frontier model right now, but for cheap ones, they are better than event the chinese models now.

That's not being debated here. The initial reported numbers were false and this was simply pointed out. You're changing the subject.

Stop lying. mattlondon said "gemini-3-8-flash shows an intelligence score of 59" which is undeniably correct. You can't say that number is false. You're literally lying.

All you had to do is go hover your mouse over "Models" in the top bar, hover over Claude Opus 5 and and click on medium: https://imgur.com/mlRCrt1

When you do that you arrive on this page: https://artificialanalysis.ai/models/claude-opus-5-medium

The gemini flash page for reference: https://artificialanalysis.ai/models/gemini-3-8-flash

You have to be an incredibly dishonest person to see a 59 on both pages and say "the initial reported numbers were false and this was simply pointed out. You're changing the subject".

Re: Gemini 3.8 Flash and 3.8 Flash Cyber

#586

Post by w4yai »

sfink wrote: post #223

For my application, I'm still happily using gemini-2.5-flash and the only problem is when it reports being overloaded. It's for interpreting a downscaled phone camera photo of a hand-written shopping list on a whiteboard, and it works stunningly well. My handwriting sucks, too. (I guess the only relevance here is that if your problem matches a model's strengths, then you can do fine with a model that is several gener…

please do yourself a favor and use something far more efficient ! GLM5.3 will make you super happy

Re: Gemini 3.8 Flash and 3.8 Flash Cyber

#588

Post by imtringued »

nomel wrote: post #488
WarmWash wrote: post #355

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Flash models are on the order of 1/10th the size of Opus models, so some flex in the thinking level is fair.

When comparing closed models, the only thing that actually matters to anyone using them is some mix of cost and speed. Considering how much memory a server is using, when evaluating models that you'll never have access to in order to host yourself, doesn't really make sense.

Your comment is really strange, why are you defensive towards WarmWash when gemini flash 3.8 high is both 6 times faster and costs less, while having the same intelligence score as claude opus 5 medium?

>Considering how much memory a server is using, when evaluating models that you'll never have access to in order to host yourself, doesn't really make sense.

This entire sentence makes no sense given what is being discussed.

https://artificialanalysis.ai/models/gemini-3-8-flash

https://artificialanalysis.ai/models/claude-opus-5-medium

Re: Gemini 3.8 Flash and 3.8 Flash Cyber

#589

Post by menaerus »

dassh wrote: post #509
jampa wrote: post #113

I've been using Gemini 3.7 for my personal trip planning app. Across multiple benchmarks, it ranks higher on everything I tried: - Real world knowledge (when a thing opens and closes, the geographic region, historical facts). It's also the best at taking a cluster of places and working out a visiting order. - Photo ranking (which photo should be the hero). Gemini can tell whether a photo is of the thing or of the vie…

In my experience, Gemini 3.7 is excellent for general non-coding tasks. But for coding, especially backend development, I still find models like Opus 5 and GPT-5.6 more reliable.

If I strip the dependencies out, I'm using it on a 5MLoC C++ codebase, and I found it performs really really well. I am using the Opus 5/Fable in parallel and I couldn't tell the difference. Both models make mistakes here and there.

Re: Gemini 3.8 Flash and 3.8 Flash Cyber

#590

Post by rickdg »

mattlondon wrote: post #23

Currently top at https://deepswe.datacurve.ai - beating Opus 5! https://artificialanalysis.ai/models/gemini-3-8-flash shows an intelligence score of 59, the same as Opus 5 medium! Wow - for a flash model this seems to benchmark powerfully. Remains to be seen what it is like to use.

Check number of agent steps.
Post reply on HN