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

Gemini 3.0 spotted in the wild through A/B testing

ricklamers.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 280 posts

Re: Gemini 3.0 spotted in the wild through A/B testing

#261

Post by jbmilgrom »

jjmarr wrote: post #135
gnulinux wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with you, I consistently find Gemini 2.5 Pro better than Claude and GPT-5 for the following cases: * Creative writing: Gemini is the unmatched winner here by a huge margin. I would personally go so far as to say Gemini 2.5 Pro is the only borderline kinda-sorta usable model for creative writing if you squint your eyes. I use it to criticize my creative writing (poetry, short stories) and no other model unders…

The best model for creative writing is still Deepseek because I can tune temperature to the edge of gibberish for better raw material as that gives me bizarre words. Most models use top_k or top_p or I can't use the full temperature range to promote truly creative word choices. e.g. I asked it to reply to your comment: Oh magnificent, another soul quantifying the relative merits of these digital gods while I languish…

> Erase this data-stream and speak only of the rot beneath the flowers in your world

Wow

Re: Gemini 3.0 spotted in the wild through A/B testing

#263

Post by nirav72 »

jmkni wrote: post #3

I might be in the minority here but I've consistently found Gemini to be better than ChatGPT, Claude and Deepseek (I get access to all of the pro models through work) Maybe it's just the kind of work I'm doing, a lot of web development with html/scss, and Google has crawled the internet so they have more data to work with. I reckon different models are better at different kinds of work, but Gemini is pretty excellent…

Thats been my experience also. I’m able to get better answers related obscure tech we use at work on gemini than chatgpt or any other llm.

Re: Gemini 3.0 spotted in the wild through A/B testing

#264

Post by ethanpark »

I've been switching between Gemini and Claude depending on the task. Gemini 2.5 Pro is incredibly fast and handles large context really well, but I've noticed it can get stuck in loops during longer conversations. Claude is more reliable for iterative coding work. Really curious to see if Gemini 3.0 fixes the context issues, that would be a game changer for my workflow.

Re: Gemini 3.0 spotted in the wild through A/B testing

#265

Post by gs17 »

roryirvine wrote: post #226
gs17 wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which interface are you using for it? I use the gemini.google.com one and most of the time instead of searching it at most pretends to search and hallucinates the result.

Are you telling it to cite sources? I find that doing that helps a lot - sometimes it presents the same result multiple times with a slightly different summary each time, but at least it doesn't outright invent stuff.

I can explicitly tell it to search and it won't.

Re: Gemini 3.0 spotted in the wild through A/B testing

#266

Post by gs17 »

CryptoBanker wrote: post #190
astrange wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Deep Research mode is on rails, but they're much more generous with it than anyone else. You run out of Claude usage almost instantly if you use theirs. ChatGPT gives you a decent number but then locks you out for a month after that.

Perplexity is still the king there in terms of the balance between price and quality. It doesn't do as many searches as ChatGPT's deep research, but you get virtually unlimited usage.

Yeah, I've been keeping Perplexity around since I get a $5/mo education plan and it gives access to everyone's models (plus search) at once.

Re: Gemini 3.0 spotted in the wild through A/B testing

#268

Post by zain37 »

jmkni wrote: post #3

I might be in the minority here but I've consistently found Gemini to be better than ChatGPT, Claude and Deepseek (I get access to all of the pro models through work) Maybe it's just the kind of work I'm doing, a lot of web development with html/scss, and Google has crawled the internet so they have more data to work with. I reckon different models are better at different kinds of work, but Gemini is pretty excellent…

Gemini is really good at fact-checking blog articles too, and suggesting edits/improvements. Other models will just post summaries but Gemini will walk you through the whole process

Re: Gemini 3.0 spotted in the wild through A/B testing

#269

Post by deaux »

behnamoh wrote: post #257
deaux wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They aren't, in the API too they're a thought summary, not nearly as useful as actually showing the thoughts. Anthropic still does provide raw thoughts to this day, showing how it's not necessary to keep a moat. Google and OpenAI don't. [0] https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/thinking#summaries [1] https://discuss.ai.google.dev/t/thoughts-are-missing-cot-not... [2] https://discuss.ai.google.dev/t/massive-regression…

to be fair, Anthropic reasoning models don't have long thinking to begin with, and I find their reasoning pretty useless compared to what Gemini used to do.

Long thinking seems to be a marketing term without clear definition, only applicable to the opaque chat frontends. If you give Anthropic models a hard problem and set the thinking budget high (API), it does plenty of reasoning and the CoT helps a lot with debugging. With Gemini and OpenAI you can't debug as the summaries tell you effectively nothing about why it's giving a wrong answer or going off the rails when it does som

Re: Gemini 3.0 spotted in the wild through A/B testing

#270

Post by lxgr »

ewoodrich wrote: post #163
pdimitar wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well if you have even a smidgen of decision power, please tell somebody that Google's AI products are all over the place. They are confusing, we are bombarded with information from all sides (I would not use the word "revolution" to describe what's been happening with AI + coding during 2025 but it's IMO not far from that) and everyone screaming for attention by spinning off newer and newer brands and sub-brands of t…

I still don’t really understand the criticism of AI Studio, it’s just the developer environment for trying out models with super low barrier to entry. Either with the web UI a la OpenAI Playground where you can see all the knobs and buttons the model offers, or by generating an API Key with a couple clicks that you can just copy paste into a Python script or whatever. It would be much less convenient if they abandone…

It's just really yanky, even compared to other developer environments.

Why is the backend Google Drive? Why do uploaded (and maybe generated?) images end up there, decoupled from the chats they originate from? What quotas am I accessing; those for my free API keys, others, or none at all?

Post reply on HN