Live data from Hacker News

Gemini-2.5-pro-preview-06-05

deepmind.google

221–230 of 237 posts

Re: Gemini-2.5-pro-preview-06-05

#221
post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's most annoying about Gemini 2.5 is that it is obnoxiously verbose compared to Opus 4. Both in explaining the code it wrote and the amount of lines it writes and comments it adds, to the point where the output is often 2-3x more than Opus 4. You can obviously alleviate this by asking it to be more concise but even then it bleeds through sometimes.

Yes this is what I mean by conciseness with o3. If prompted well it can produce extremely high level quality code that blows me away at times. I've also had several instances now where I gave it slightly wrong context and other models just butchered a solution with dozens of lines for the proposed fix which I could tell wasn't right and then after reverting and asking o3, it immediately went searching for another fil…

Personally I still am of the opinion current LLMs are more of a very advanced autocomplete.

I have to think of the guy posting that he fed his entire project codebase to an AI, it refactored everything, modularizing it but still reducing the file count from 20 to 12. "It was glorious to see. Nothing worked of course, but glorious nonetheless".

In the future I can certainly see it get better and better, especially because code is a hard science that reduces down to control flow logic which reduces down to math. It's a much more narrow problem space than, say, poetry or visuals.

Re: Gemini-2.5-pro-preview-06-05

#222

I'd start to worry about OpenAI, from a valuation standpoint. The company has some serious competition now and is arguably no longer the leader. its going to be interesting to see how easily they can raise more money. Their valuation is already in the $300B range. How much larger can it get given their relatively paltry revenue at the moment and increasingly rising costs for hardware and electricity. If the next gene…

> At even a $300B valuation a typical wall street analysts would want to value them at 2x sales which would mean they'd expect OpenAI to have $600B in annual sales to account for this valuation when they go public. Lmfao where did you get this from? Microsoft has less than half of that revenue, and is valued > 10x than OpenAI. Revenue is not the metric by which these companies are valued...

The difference between Microsoft and OAI is that Microsoft can spend a lump sum of money on Excel and a fraction of that on its support and then sell it infinitely with almost no additional costs. MS can add a million of new Excel users tomorrow and that would be almost pure profit. (I'm very simplifying)

OAI on the other hand must spend a lot of additional money for every single new user, both free and paid. Adding million new OAI users tomorrow would mean gigantic negative red hole in the profits (adding to the existing negative). OAI has no or almost no benefits of scale, unlike other industries.

I have no knowledge about corporate valuations, but I strongly suspect that OAI valuation need to include this issue.

Re: Gemini-2.5-pro-preview-06-05

#223
post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it is likely that the comments are more for the model than for the user. I would not be even slightly surprised if verbose coding versions outperformed light commenting versions.

On the other hand, I'm skeptical if that has any impact because these models have thinking tokens where they can put all those comments and attention shouldn't care about how close the tokens are as long as they're within the context window.

The excessive comments might help the model when it's called again to re edit the code in the future - wouldn't be surprised if it was optimizing for vibe coding and the redundant comments reinforce the function/intent of the line when it's being modified down the line

Re: Gemini-2.5-pro-preview-06-05

#224
post #32

I found all the previous Gemini models somewhat inferior even compared to Claude 3.7 Sonnet (and much worse than 4) as my coding assistants. I'm keeping an open mind but also not rushing to try this one until some evaluations roll in. I'm actually baffled that the internet at large seems to be very pumped about Gemini but it's not reflective of my personal experience. Not to be that tinfoil hat guy but I smell at lea…

I mean, they're cheaper models and they aren't as much if a pain about rate limiting as Claude was/they have a pretty solid depenresesrch without restrictive usage limits. IDK how it is for long running agentic stuff, would be surprised if it was anywhere near the other models, but for a general chatgpt competitor it doesn't matter if it's not as good as opus 4 if it's way cheaper and won't use up your usage limit

Re: Gemini-2.5-pro-preview-06-05

#225
post #89
post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I found all the previous Gemini models somewhat inferior even compared to Claude 3.7 Sonnet (and much worse than 4) as my coding assistants. What are your usecases? Really not my experience, Claude disappoints in Data Science and complex ETL requests in python. O3 on the other hand really is phenomenal.

Backend python code, postgres database. Front end: Reeact/NextJS. Very common stack in 2025. Using LLMs in assist mode (not as agents) for enhancing the existing code base that weighs in under 1MM LoC. So not a greenfield project anymore but not a huge amount of legacy cruft either.

I still have the Claude subscription, so I will take a look again and see.

Re: Gemini-2.5-pro-preview-06-05

#226
post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

o3 is still my favorite over even Opus 4 in most cases. I've spent hundreds of dollars on AI code gen tools in the last month alone and my ranking is: 1. o3 - it's just really damn good at nuance, getting to the core of the goal, and writing the closest thing to quality production level code. The only negative is it's cutoff window and cost, especially with it's love of tools. That's not usually a big deal for the Ra…

How do you choose which model to use with Claude Code?

In case you're asking for the literal command...

/model

Re: Gemini-2.5-pro-preview-06-05

#227
post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The hurdle for OpenAI is going to be on the profit side. Google has their own hardware acceleration and their own data centers. OpenAI has to pay a monopolist for hardware acceleration and beholden to another tech giant for data centers. Never mind that Google can customize it's hardware specifically for it's models. The only way for OpenAI to really get ahead on solid ground is to discover some sort of absolute game…

OpenAI has now partnered with Jony Ive now and they are going to have thinnest data centers with thinnest servers mounted on thinnest racks. And since everything is so thin, servers can just whisper to each other instead of communicating via fat cables. I think that will be the game changer OpenAI will show us soon.

Yep and I heard the servers will only have two USB-C ports for all I/O, but of course dongles will be available.

Re: Gemini-2.5-pro-preview-06-05

#228
The truth is that Gemini 2.5 6-05 is a fraud in coding; before, out of 10 codes you wrote, 1 or 2 might not work, meaning they had errors. Now, out of 10 codes, 9 or 10 are wrong. Why does it have so many errors???

Re: Gemini-2.5-pro-preview-06-05

#229

The truth is that Gemini 2.5 6-05 is a fraud in coding; before, out of 10 codes you wrote, 1 or 2 might not work, meaning they had errors. Now, out of 10 codes, 9 or 10 are wrong. Why does it have so many errors???

it have more skill in coding but have a lot of errors, i can't code anything

Re: Gemini-2.5-pro-preview-06-05

#230

I'd start to worry about OpenAI, from a valuation standpoint. The company has some serious competition now and is arguably no longer the leader. its going to be interesting to see how easily they can raise more money. Their valuation is already in the $300B range. How much larger can it get given their relatively paltry revenue at the moment and increasingly rising costs for hardware and electricity. If the next gene…

There is some serious confusion about the strength of OpenAIs position. "chatgpt" is a verb. People have no idea what claude or gemini are, and they will not be interested in it, unless something absolutely fantastic happens. Being a little better will do absolutely nothing to convince normal people to change product (the little moat that ChatGPT has simply by virtue of chat history is probably enough from a convenie…

Xerox was a verb too
Post reply on HN