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

Gemini 3.1 Pro

blog.google

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

551–560 of 951 posts

Re: Gemini 3.1 Pro

#551

Post by cheema33 »

agentifysh wrote: post #450

My enthusiasm is a bit muted this cycle because I've been burned by Gemini CLI. These models are very capable but Gemini CLI just doesn't seem to be able to work for one it never follows instructions strictly like its competitors do, and it hallucinates even which is a rarity. More importantly feels like Google is stretched thin across different Gemini products and pricing reflects this, I still have no idea how to p…

> I still have no idea how to pay for Gemini CLI, in codex/claude its very simple $20/month for entry and $200/month for ton of weekly usage.

This!

I would like to sign up for a paid plan for Gemini CLI. But I have not been able to figure out how. I already have Codex and Claude plans. Those were super easy to sign up for.

Re: Gemini 3.1 Pro

#552

Post by jstummbillig »

sdeiley wrote: post #548

People underrate Google's cost effectiveness so much. Half price of Opus. HALF. Think about ANY other product and what you'd expect from the competition thats half the price. Yet people here act like Gemini is dead weight ____ Update: 3.1 was 40% of the cost to run AA index vs Opus Thinking AND SONNET, beat Opus, and still 30% faster for output speed. https://artificialanalysis.ai/?speed=intelligence-vs-speed&m...

It's not half price or cost effective if it can't do the job, that I am happy to pay twice the price for to get done.

But I agree: If they can get there (at one point in the past year I felt they were the best choice for agentic coding), their pricing is very interesting. I am optimistic that it would not require them to go up to Opus pricing.

Re: Gemini 3.1 Pro

#553

Post by mikestorrent »

slopinthebag wrote: post #289
spankalee wrote: post #199

I hope this works better than 3.0 Pro I'm a former Googler and know some people near the team, so I mildly root for them to at least do well, but Gemini is consistently the most frustrating model I've used for development. It's stunningly good at reasoning, design, and generating the raw code, but it just falls over a lot when actually trying to get things done, especially compared to Claude Opus. Within VS Code Copi…

Hmm, interesting.. My workflow is to basically use it to explain new concepts, generate code snippets inline or fill out function bodies, etc. Not really generating code autonomously in a loop. Do you think it would excel at this?

I think that you should really try to get whatever agent you can to work on that kind of thing for you - guide it with the creation of testing frameworks and code coverage, focus more on the test cases with your human intellect, and let it work to pass them.

Re: Gemini 3.1 Pro

#554

Post by mrcwinn »

It's fascinating to watch this community react to positively to Google model releases and so negatively toward OpenAI's. You all do understand that an ad revenue model is exactly where Google will go, right?

Re: Gemini 3.1 Pro

#555

Post by Decabytes »

sdeiley wrote: post #548

People underrate Google's cost effectiveness so much. Half price of Opus. HALF. Think about ANY other product and what you'd expect from the competition thats half the price. Yet people here act like Gemini is dead weight ____ Update: 3.1 was 40% of the cost to run AA index vs Opus Thinking AND SONNET, beat Opus, and still 30% faster for output speed. https://artificialanalysis.ai/?speed=intelligence-vs-speed&m...

Any tips for working with Gemini through its chat interface? I’ve worked with ChatGPT and Claude and I’ve generally found them pleasant to work with, but everytime I use Gemini the output is straight dookie

Re: Gemini 3.1 Pro

#556

Post by mikestorrent »

nicce wrote: post #388
jbellis wrote: post #278

Earlier quoted context omitted.

yeah, g3p is as smart or smarter as the other flagships but it's just not reliable enough, it will go into "thinking loops" and burn 10s of 1000s of tokens repeating itself. https://blog.brokk.ai/gemini-3-pro-preview-not-quite-baked/ hopefully 3.1 is better.

> it will go into "thinking loops" and burn 10s of 1000s of tokens repeating itself. Maybe it is just a genius business strategy.

Similarly, Cursor's "Auto Mode" purports to use whichever model is best for your request, but it's only reasonable to assume it uses whatever model is best for Cursor at that moment

Re: Gemini 3.1 Pro

#557

Post by neves »

stephen_cagle wrote: post #470
spankalee wrote: post #199

I hope this works better than 3.0 Pro I'm a former Googler and know some people near the team, so I mildly root for them to at least do well, but Gemini is consistently the most frustrating model I've used for development. It's stunningly good at reasoning, design, and generating the raw code, but it just falls over a lot when actually trying to get things done, especially compared to Claude Opus. Within VS Code Copi…

I also worked at Google (on the original Gemini, when it was still Bard internally) and my experience largely mirrors this. My finding is that Gemini is pretty great for factual information and also it is the only one that I can reliably (even with the video camera) take a picture of a bird and have it tell me what the bird is. But it is just pretty bad as a model to help with development, myself and everyone I know…

Gemini interesting with Google software gives me the best feature of all LLMs. When I receive a invite for an event, I screenshot it, share with Gemini app and say: add to my Calendar.

It's not very complex, but a great time saver

Re: Gemini 3.1 Pro

#558

Post by SV_BubbleTime »

sdeiley wrote: post #548

People underrate Google's cost effectiveness so much. Half price of Opus. HALF. Think about ANY other product and what you'd expect from the competition thats half the price. Yet people here act like Gemini is dead weight ____ Update: 3.1 was 40% of the cost to run AA index vs Opus Thinking AND SONNET, beat Opus, and still 30% faster for output speed. https://artificialanalysis.ai/?speed=intelligence-vs-speed&m...

Well, it’s half if the product is equal.

Is it? Honestly, I still chuckle about black Nazis and the female Indian Popes. That was my first impression of Gemini, and first impressions are hard to break. I used Gemini’s VL (vision) for something and it refused to describe because it assumed it was NSFW imagery, which is was not.

I also question statis as an obvious follow up. Is Gemini equal to Opus? Today? Tomorrow? Has Google led the industry thus far and do I expect them to continue?

Counterpoint to that would be that with natural language input and output, that LLM specific tooling is rare and it is easy to switch around if you commoditize the product backend.

Re: Gemini 3.1 Pro

#559

Post by Svoka »

sdeiley wrote: post #548

People underrate Google's cost effectiveness so much. Half price of Opus. HALF. Think about ANY other product and what you'd expect from the competition thats half the price. Yet people here act like Gemini is dead weight ____ Update: 3.1 was 40% of the cost to run AA index vs Opus Thinking AND SONNET, beat Opus, and still 30% faster for output speed. https://artificialanalysis.ai/?speed=intelligence-vs-speed&m...

While price is definitely important, results are extremely important. Gemini often falls into the 'didn't do' it part of the spectrum, this days Opus almost always does 'good enough'.

Gemini definitely has its merits but for me it just doesn't do what other models can. I vibe-coded an app which recommends me restaurants. The app uses gemini API to make restaurants given bunch of data and prompt.

App itself is vibe-coded with Opus. Gemini didn't cut it.

Re: Gemini 3.1 Pro

#560

Post by cyanydeez »

sdeiley wrote: post #548

People underrate Google's cost effectiveness so much. Half price of Opus. HALF. Think about ANY other product and what you'd expect from the competition thats half the price. Yet people here act like Gemini is dead weight ____ Update: 3.1 was 40% of the cost to run AA index vs Opus Thinking AND SONNET, beat Opus, and still 30% faster for output speed. https://artificialanalysis.ai/?speed=intelligence-vs-speed&m...

Some people like blackjack and a technical edge with card counting, others just say screw it and do slot machines.
Post reply on HN