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

821–830 of 951 posts

Re: Gemini 3.1 Pro

#821

Post by scrollop »

sigmoid10 wrote: post #594
sheepscreek wrote: post #580

If it’s any consolation, it was able to one-shot a UI & data sync race condition that even Opus 4.6 struggled to fix (across 3 attempts). So far I like how it’s less verbose than its predecessor. Seems to get to the point quicker too. While it gives me hope, I am going to play it by the ear. Otherwise it’s going to be - Gemini for world knowledge/general intelligence/R&D and Opus/Sonnet 4.6 to finish it off. UPDATE:…

For me it's Opus 4.6 for researching code/digging through repos, gpt 5.3 codex for writing code, gemini for single hardcore science/math algorithms and grok for things the others refuse to answer or skirt around (e.g. some security/exploitability related queries). Get yourself one of those wrappers that support all models and forget thinking about who has the best model. The question is who has the best model for you…

Using simtheory.ai which is very good, you can switch models within a conversation and use mcps

Re: Gemini 3.1 Pro

#822

Post by faebi »

I'm doing Ruby and Gemini 3.0 pro has by far been the best model for me. It writes the nicest ruby code, like I would. Further, it either succeeds or fails hard and obviously. I prefer it failing hard instead of of slowly going weird in my code.

Similar in antigravity. Privately it's my absolute favorite.

So I'm actually rooting for this.

Re: Gemini 3.1 Pro

#823

Post by carpe__diem »

One thing I’d like to see in these releases is stronger emphasis on regression behavior, not just headline capability.

In production, the costly failures are usually "almost right" edits that quietly shift semantics across large diffs.

We now gate model upgrades behind a fixed eval set of our own repos + prompts and compare pass rates by task category (refactor, test repair, API migration). Raw benchmark gains matter less to us than variance and rollback safety. If 3.1 improves consistency on long multi-file edits, that’s a bigger win than a small jump on one-shot tasks.

Re: Gemini 3.1 Pro

#824

Post by blitzar »

fragmede wrote: post #708
sdeiley wrote: post #615

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What did you say? Cant hear you over the $400B in capex spend. Counterpoint: price will matter before we hit AGI

Why do you believe it has to? Uber took 15 years to show a profit. 15 years from 2022 when chatgpt launched is 2037. That's long enough that to say I don't know if I'll even be alive by then.

Uber didnt burn the market cap of the 10th largest company in the world every couple of years.

Re: Gemini 3.1 Pro

#825

Post by thot_experiment »

boppo1 wrote: post #725
thot_experiment wrote: post #667

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's actually staggering to me how bad gemini has been working with my current project which involves a lot of color space math. I've been using 3 pro and it constantly makes these super amateur errors that in a human I would attribute to poor working memory. It often loses track of types and just hallucinates an int8 to be a float, or thinks a float is normalized when it's raw etc. It feels like how I write code whe…

I'm interested in color space math, is your project public?

Naw, it's art code, but feel free to reach out if you want to talk about color math.

Re: Gemini 3.1 Pro

#826

Post by user34283 »

tempestn wrote: post #742
rhubarbtree wrote: post #642

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google are stuck because they have to compete with OpenAI. If they don’t, they face an existential threat to their advertising business. But then they leave the door open for Anthropic on coding, enterprise and agentic workflows. Sensibly, that’s what they seem to be doing. That said Gemini is noticeably worse than ChatGPT (it’s quite erratic) and Anthropic’s work on coding / reasoning seems to be filtering back to i…

In my experience Gemini 3.0 pro is noticeably better than chatgpt 5.2 for non-coding tasks. The latter gives me blatantly wrong information all the time, the former very rarely.

I agree and it has been my almost exclusive go to ever since Gemini 3 Pro came out in November.

In my opinion Google isn't as far behind in coding as comments here would suggest. With Fast, it might already have edited 5 files before Claude Sonnet finished processing your prompt.

There is a lot of potential here, and with Antigravity as well as Gemini CLI - I did not test that one - they are working on capitalizing on it.

Re: Gemini 3.1 Pro

#827

Post by Alex-Programs »

ojr wrote: post #723
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 primarily use Gemini 3 Flash with a GUI coding agent I made by myself and its been able to successfully one-shot mostly any task I throw at it. Why would I ever use a more expensive reasoning and slower reasoning model? I am impressed with the library knowledge Gemini knows, I don't use any skills or MCP and its able to implement functions to perfection. No one crawls more data than Google and their model reflects…

I'm curious, what's the agent like?

If I were to build something for Gemini models I'd plan around ingesting a bunch of context then oneshotting it.

Re: Gemini 3.1 Pro

#828

Post by arnorhs »

kingstnap wrote: post #789
WarmWash wrote: post #626

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Gemini is the most paradoxical model because it benchmarks great even in private benchmarks done by regular people, Deep Mind is unquestionably full of capable engineers with incredible skill, and personally Gemini has been great for my day job and my coding for fun (not for profit) endeavors. Switching between it and 4.6 in antigravity and I don't see much of a difference, they both do what I ask. But man, people ar…

I personally found Gemini 3.0 to step on my toes in Agentic coding. I tried it around 10 or so times but it quickly became apparent that it was somehow coming to its own conclusions about what needs to be done instead of following instructions. Like files I didn't mention being edited and read and stuff of that nature. Sometimes this is cute in fixing typos in docs but when its changing things where it clearly doesn'…

The only cases where I've had gemini step on my toes like that is when a) I realized my instructions were unclear or missing something b) my assumptions/instructions were flawed about how/why something needed to be done.

Re: Gemini 3.1 Pro

#829

Post by ubercore »

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…

Apologize for the low effort comment, but your description of Gemini kind of reminds me of my impression of Google's approach to products too. There's often brilliance there, confounded by sometimes muddled approaches.

What's Conway's Law for LLM models going to be called?

Re: Gemini 3.1 Pro

#830

Post by Squarex »

svara wrote: post #456
dist-epoch wrote: post #390

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Musk said Grok 5 is currently being trained, and it has 7 trillion params (Grok 4 had 3)

My understanding is that all recent gains are from post training and no one (publicly) knows how much scaling pretraining will still help at this point. Happy to learn more about this if anyone has more information.

I still remember gemini 1.5 ultra and gpt 4.5 as extremely strong at some areas that no benchmark capture. It was probably not economical to use them at 20 usd subscription, but they felt differently and smarter at some ways. The benchmarks seems to be missing something, because flash 3 was very close on some benchmarks to 3 pro, but much, much dumber.
Post reply on HN