Live data from Hacker News

Gemini 3.1 Pro

blog.google

681–690 of 951 posts

Re: Gemini 3.1 Pro

#682

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...

That sounds great, but if Opus generates 20% better code think of the ramifications of that on a real world project. Already $100/month gets you a programmer (or maybe even 2 or 3) that can do your work for you. Insanity. Do I even care if there is something 80% as good for 50% the cost? My answer: no. That said, if it is every bit as good, and their benchmarks suggest it is (but proof will be in testing it out), the…

If I was building an application using massive amounts of calls to the api, I’d probably go with Gemini. For a Copilot, definitely Opus.

Re: Gemini 3.1 Pro

#683

Does well on SVGs outside of "pelican riding on a bicycle" test. Like this prompt: "create a svg of a unicorn playing xbox" https://www.svgviewer.dev/s/NeKACuHj Still some tweaks to the final result, but I am guessing with the ARC-AGI benchmark jumping so much, the model's visual abilities are allowing it to do this well.

Animated SVGs are one of the example in the press release. Which is fine, I just think the weird SVG benchmark is now dead. Gemini has beat the benchmark and now differences are just coming down to taste. I don't know if it got these abilities through generalization or if google gave it a dedicated animated SVG RL suite that got it to improve so much between models. Regardless we need a new vibe check benchmark ala b…

What benchmark, though? There is very clearly a lot of room for improvement in its SVG making capabilities. The fact that it can now, finally, make a pelican on a bike that isn’t completely wrong is not an indicator that SVG generation is now a solved problem.

Re: Gemini 3.1 Pro

#684

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is something that bothers me. We had a beautiful trend on the Web of the browser also being the debugger - from View Source decades ago all the way up to the modern browser console inspired by Firebug. Everything was visible, under the hood, if you cared to look. Now, a lot of "thinking" is taking place under a shroud, and only so much of it can be expanded for visibility and insight into the process. Where is t…

If that's what you're after, tou MITM it and setup a proxy so Claude Code or whatever sends to your program, and then that program forwards it to Anthropics's server (or whomever). That way, you get everything .

I'm aware that this is possible, and thank you for the suggestion, but surely you can see that it's a relatively large lift; may not work in controlled enterprise environments; and compared to just right click -> view source it's basically inaccessible to anyone who might have wanted to dabble.

Re: Gemini 3.1 Pro

#686

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 used Gemini through Antigravity IDE in Planning mode and had generally good experience. It was pretty capable, but I don't really read chat history, I don't trust it. I just look at the diffs.

Re: Gemini 3.1 Pro

#687

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...

The order of priority for most people is: 1\ output quality 2\ latency 3\ cost. I will always pays more money if output quality is significantly better and latency is worth the tradeoff. There's also enough cost optimization strategies for applied AI applications that token cost rarely outweighs unless it's a SIGNIFICANT difference (e.x. 100-200% more).

Re: Gemini 3.1 Pro

#688

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...

Do they offer a subscription like Claude? These models waste so many tokens "thinking", that using via API is a complete waste of money.

Re: Gemini 3.1 Pro

#689
post #361

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agree the raw thought-stream is not useful. It's likely filled with "Aha!" and "But wait!" statements.

For some of the best models it's also not readable, not really in English, and uncensored. https://x.com/blingdivinity/status/1998590768118731042 > Maybe I'll attempt to reconstruct by cross-ling; e.g., in natural language corpora, the string " Seahorse" seldom; but I can't. > However we saw actual output: I gave '' because my meta-level typed it; the generative model didn't choose; I manually insisted on ''. So we d…

Yes, this was the case with Gemini 3.0 Pro Preview's CoT which was in a subtle "bird language". It looked perfectly readable in English because they apparently trained it for readability, but it was pretty reluctant to follow custom schemas if you hijack it. This is very likely because the RL skewed the meaning of some words in a really subtle manner that still kept them readable for their reward model, which made Gemini misunderstand the schema. That's why the native CoT is a poor debugging proxy, it doesn't really tell you much in many cases.

Gemini 2.5 and 3.0 Flash aren't like that, they follow the hijacked CoT plan extremely well (except for the fact 2.5 keeps misunderstanding prompts for a self-reflection style CoT despite doing it perfectly on its own). I haven't experimented with 3.1 yet.

Re: Gemini 3.1 Pro

#690

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's half the price per token. Not all tokens are generated equally.

Neither are cars but Ill take a Porsche over a Ferrari for a fraction of the price.

What about a Porsche vs. a Toyota Camry for half the price?
Post reply on HN