Live data from Hacker News

Google releases Gemma 4 open models

deepmind.google

121–130 of 507 posts

Re: Google releases Gemma 4 open models

#121
There are so many heavy hitting cracked people like daniel from unsloth and chris lattner coming out of the woodworks for this with their own custom stuff.

How does the ecosystem work? Have things converged and standardized enough where it's "easy" (lol, with tooling) to swap out parts such as weights to fit your needs? Do you need to autogen new custom kernels to fix said things? Super cool stuff.

Re: Google releases Gemma 4 open models

#122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We are always figuring out what parameter size makes sense. The decision is always a mix between how good we can make the models from a technical aspect, with how good they need to be to make all of you super excited to use them. And its a bit of a challenge what is an ever changing ecosystem. I'm personally curious is there a certain parameter size you're looking for?

how good they need to be to make all of you super excited to use them Isn't that more dictated by the competition you're facing from Llama and Qwent?

This is going to sound like a corp answer but I mean this genuinely as an individual engineer. Google is a leader in its field and that means we get to chart our own path and do what is best for research and for users.

I personally strive to build software and models provides provides the best and most usable experience for lots of people. I did this before I joined google with open source, and my writing on "old school" generative models, and I'm lucky that I get to this at Google in the current LLM era.

Re: Google releases Gemma 4 open models

#123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thinking vs non-thinking. There'll be a token cost there. But still fairly remarkable!

Is there a reason we can't use thinking completions to train non-thinking? i.e. gradient descent towards what thinking would have answered?

From what I've read, that's already part of their training. They are scored based on each step of their reasoning and not just their solution. I don't know if it's still the case, but for the early reasoning models, the "reasoning" output was more of a GUI feature to entertain the user than an actual explanation of the steps being followed.

Re: Google releases Gemma 4 open models

#124
post #18

Google might not have the best coding models (yet) but they seem to have the most intelligent and knowledgeable models of all especially Gemini 3.1 Pro is something. One more thing about Google is that they have everything that others do not: 1. Huge data, audio, video, geospatial 2. Tons of expertise. Attention all you need was born there. 3. Libraries that they wrote. 4. Their own data centers and cloud. 4. Most of…

I agree with the theory and maybe consumers will too. But damn, the actual products are bad.

Re: Google releases Gemma 4 open models

#126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I recently canceled my Google One subscription because getting accurate answers out of Gemini for chat is basically impossible afaict. Whether I enable thinking makes no difference: Gemini always answers me super quickly, rarely actually looks something up, and lies to me. It has a really bad unchecked hallucination problem because it prioritizes speed over accuracy and (astonishingly, to me) is way more hesitant to…

Recently I had a pretty basic question about whether there was a Factorio mod for something so decided to ask it to Gemini, it hallucinated not one but two sadly non-existing mods. Even Grok is better at search.

Whenever I ask it questions about videogames (even very old ones), the odds that it will lie to me are very high. I only see LLMs get those right when they go look them up online.

The other thing that kills me about Gemini is that the voice recognition is god-awful. All of the chat interfaces I use have transcriptions that include errors (which the bot usually treats unthinkingly as what I actually said, instead of acting as if we may be using a fallible voice transcription), but Gemini's is the worst by far. I often have to start conversations over because of such badly mangled transcriptions.

The accuracy problems are the biggest and most important frustrations, but I also find Gemini insufferably chummy and condescending. It often resorts to ELI5 metaphors when describing things to me where the whole metaphor is based on some tenuous link to some small factoid it thinks it remembers about my life.

The experiences it seems people get out of Gemini today seem like a waste of a frontier lab's resources tbf. If I wanted fast but lower quality I'd go to one of the many smaller providers that aren't frontier labs because lots of them are great at speed and/or efficiency. (If I wanted an AI companion, Google doesn't seem like the right choice either.)

Re: Google releases Gemma 4 open models

#127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lm arena is so easy to game that it's ceased to be a relevant metric over a year ago. People are not usable validators beyond "yeah that looks good to me", nobody checks if the facts are correct or not.

It's easy to game and human evaluation data has its trade-offs, but it's way easier to fake public benchmark results. I wish we had a source of high quality private benchmark results across a vast number of models like Lmarena. Having high quality human evaluation data would be a plus too.

Well there was this one [0] which is a black box but hasn't really been kept up to date with newer releases. Arguably we'd need lots of these since each one could be biased towards some use case or sell its test set to someone with more VC money than sense.

[0] https://oobabooga.github.io/benchmark.html

Re: Google releases Gemma 4 open models

#128
post #45
post #15

Comparison of Gemma 4 vs. Qwen 3.5 benchmarks, consolidated from their respective Hugging Face model cards: | Model | MMLUP | GPQA | LCB | ELO | TAU2 | MMMLU | HLE-n | HLE-t | |----------------|-------|-------|-------|------|-------|-------|-------|-------| | G4 31B | 85.2% | 84.3% | 80.0% | 2150 | 76.9% | 88.4% | 19.5% | 26.5% | | G4 26B A4B | 82.6% | 82.3% | 77.1% | 1718 | 68.2% | 86.3% | 8.7% | 17.2% | | G4 E4B |…

Wild differences in ELO compared to tfa's graph: https://storage.googleapis.com/gdm-deepmind-com-prod-public/... (Comparing Q3.5-27B to G4 26B A4B and G4 31B specifically) I'd assume Q3.5-35B-A3B would performe worse than the Q3.5 deep 27B model, but the cards you pasted above, somehow show that for ELO and TAU2 it's the other way around... Very impressed by unsloth's team releasing the GGUF so quickly, if that's lik…

the benchmarks showing the "old" Chinese qwen models performing basically on par with this fancy new release kinda has me thinking the google models are DOA no? what am I missing?

Re: Google releases Gemma 4 open models

#129
post #70

Hi all! I work on the Gemma team, one of many as this one was a bigger effort given it was a mainline release. Happy to answer whatever questions I can

On LM Studio I'm only seeing models/google/gemma-4-26b-a4b Where can I download the full model? I have 128GB Mac Studio

downloading the official ones for my m3 max 128GB via lm studio I can't seem to get them to load. they fail for some unknown reason. have to dig into the logs. any luck for you?

Re: Google releases Gemma 4 open models

#130
post #18

Google might not have the best coding models (yet) but they seem to have the most intelligent and knowledgeable models of all especially Gemini 3.1 Pro is something. One more thing about Google is that they have everything that others do not: 1. Huge data, audio, video, geospatial 2. Tons of expertise. Attention all you need was born there. 3. Libraries that they wrote. 4. Their own data centers and cloud. 4. Most of…

I recently canceled my Google One subscription because getting accurate answers out of Gemini for chat is basically impossible afaict. Whether I enable thinking makes no difference: Gemini always answers me super quickly, rarely actually looks something up, and lies to me. It has a really bad unchecked hallucination problem because it prioritizes speed over accuracy and (astonishingly, to me) is way more hesitant to…

I used Gemma 3 for quite a few things offline and found it to be very helpful. Your experience with Gemini is very similar to mine, though. I hate the way it speaks with this fake-excited, reddit-coded, condescending tone and it is useless for coding.
Post reply on HN