271–280 of 280 posts
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…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I like the pelican riding a bike test, but my standards for what’s “good” seem higher than generally expected by others. The models can generate hyper realistic renders of pelicans riding bikes in png format. They also have perfect knowledge of the SVG spec, and comprehensive knowledge of most human creative artistic endeavours. They should be able to produce astonishing results for the request. I don’t want to see a…
>I like the pelican riding a bike test, but my standards for what’s “good” seem higher than generally expected by others. If you train for your first marathon, is your goal to run it under 2h? We are all looking forward to perfect results, but our standards are reasonable. We know what the results were last month, and judge the improvement velocity. Nobody thinks that's a good SVG of a pelican riding a bike - on it's…
To use your marathon metaphor, they have the body of Kipchoge in his absolute prime, and are failing to qualify for a local fun-run.
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…
We extensively benchmark frontier models at $DAYJOB and Gemini 2.5 is the uncontested king outside of a few narrow use cases. Tracks with the rumor that Google has the best pretraining and falls short only in tuning/alignment. Eagerly anticipating Gemini 3 as 2.5, while king of the hill, still has lots of room for improvement! Edit: narrow use cases are roughly "true reasoning" (GPT-5) and Python script writing (the…
All I can hope for is that the “effective context window” (some level before competency plummets) is like 1m+ tokens. I would give a finger to just put my entire codebase into a model every time I want to talk to it. For now I’m still only talking to parts of the codebase, so to speak.
Have you tried Claude Code, Cursor, Codex CLI, Gemini CLI, etc?
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…
I am curious what your background is. I also almost exclusively use Gemini 2.5, and my PhD colleagues in comp sci do the same. However it seems like the general public, or people outside this bubble are more likely to use ChatGPT or Claude. I wonder if it has something to do with the level of abstraction and questions that you give to Gemini, which might be related to the profession or way of typing.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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…
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…
I disagree with the complex reasoning aspect. Sure, Gemini will more often output a complete proof that is correct (likely because of the longer context training) but this is not particularly useful in math research. What you really want is an out-of-the-box idea coming from some theorem or concept you didn't know before that you can apply to make it further in a difficult proof. In my experience, GPT-5 absolutely do…
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…
The sentiment in this thread surprises me a great deal. For me, Gemini 2.5 Pro is markedly worse than GPT-5 Thinking along every axis of hallucinations, rigidity in its self-assured correctness and sycophancy. Claude Opus used to be marginally better but now Claude Sonnet 4.5 is far better, although not quite on par with GPT-5 Thinking. I frequently ask the same question side-by-side to all 3 and the only situation i…