I am reading opinions here from agent users, but I haven't adopted the "agentic workflow" myself because I believe I am (for now) now getting a lot of my trouble's worth using Gemini (3 Pro) in the traditional conversational manner. It is adequate at suggesting solutions in the form of code, or reasoning in general. My problems are software engineering but also everything that is not, since I have a subscription it's my go to problem solving partner. I see no reasons to switch to another product for now either, I am constantly in the loop getting samples of chats with Grok and ChatGPT and it seems a very close race. If Claude is that one race horse that's built different -- and I absolutely can believe it is so because they have rightfully tuned it -- I am not convinced I am missing out much. But maybe because I am more traditionalist to most of everyone's having embraced the idea of having an agent run a loop on their workstation(s) and trusting it to deliver. Perhaps if I were in more of a tight time frame, I'd be pressed to do so myself, but for now I am already benefiting from the extra speed "rubberducking" with Gemini all manner of software engineering problems that I need to solve, so I simply have no reasons to abandon it. I think this is also Google's strength -- they have the data, they've already integrated Gemini or a variant of it anyway, into google.com which is one of their prized cash cows, and it's everywhere else too. Like others here have said, Google may not have the absolute best in class at all times, but they're fairly good and they still have the brains that gave us DeepMind and GPT, unless there's some sort of stagnation going on in their ranks, I expect they're not resting on the laurels. With their capital they're still at the head of the race. Anthropic and OpenAI have the benefit of being nimble, though, and it shows too. Anyway, competition is good, the cat's out of the bag and on the greener side of the river :-)
Gemini 3.1 Pro
861–870 of 951 posts
Re: Gemini 3.1 Pro
#862Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Today, we’re releasing a research preview of GPT‑5.3‑Codex‑Spark, a smaller version of GPT‑5.3‑Codex , and our first model designed for real-time coding. from https://openai.com/index/introducing-gpt-5-3-codex-spark/ , emphasis mine
You're right. It's funny because I kind of noticed that, but with all of these subtle model issues, I'm so used to being distraught by the smallest thing I've had to learn to 'trust the data' aka the charts, model standings, performance, etc. and in this case, I was under the assumption 'it was the same model' clearly it's not. Which is a bummer because it would be nice to try a true side-by-side analysis.
> It's funny because I kind of noticed that
It's less funny when you consider that you were very confident about it, yet now it seems you haven't even bothered to run the model yourself, as you'd notice how different the quality of responses were, not just the speed.
Kind of makes me ignore everything else you wrote too, because why would that be correct when you surely haven't validated that before writing it, and you got the basics wrong?
Re: Gemini 3.1 Pro
#863Yes people are too fixated on just the model. The real question for coding use cases is - does Gemini X + Gemini CLI outperform Opus + Claude Code? With 3.0 the answer was no. I won’t waste time checking 3.1 until I hear otherwise.
Re: Gemini 3.1 Pro
#864People 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 half the price for now, let them gain market traction and ser the price come up. GCP isn’t exactly affordable.
Re: Gemini 3.1 Pro
#865I had it coding autonomously for about an hour (including lots of tool wait time) on a difficult task, and it actually produced good results.
What’s most surprising is that I had it follow a strict loop/workflow and it did that perfectly. Normally these things go off the rails after a while with complex workflows. It’s something I have to usually enforce with some orchestration script and multiple agents, but this time it was just one session meticulously following orders.
Impressive, and saves a lot of time on building the orchestration glue.
Re: Gemini 3.1 Pro
#866[deleted]
Re: Gemini 3.1 Pro
#867Surprisingly big jump in ARC-AGI-2 from 31% to 77%, guess there's some RLHF focused on the benchmark given it was previously far behind the competition and is now ahead. Apart from that, the usual predictable gains in coding. Still is a great sweet-spot for performance, speed and cost. Need to hack Claude Code to use their agentic logic+prompts but use Gemini models. I wish Google also updated Flash-lite to 3.0+, wou…
The only thing I can notice is deep research is better. Like much closer to outputting a paper from arxiv straight away.
I am really the bottleneck now and what to do with all this new information.
Re: Gemini 3.1 Pro
#868Earlier quoted context omitted.
I had an interesting experience recently where I ran Opus 4.6 against a problem that o4-mini had previously convinced me wasn't tractable... and Opus 4.6 found me a great solution. https://github.com/simonw/sqlite-chronicle/issues/20 This inspired me to point the latest models at a bunch of my older projects, resulting in a flurry of fixes and unblocks.
I continue to get great value out of having claude and codex bound together in a loop: https://github.com/pjlsergeant/moarcode
And there was many a chuckle at the Geminicide
Re: Gemini 3.1 Pro
#869Earlier quoted context omitted.
Don't get me started on the thinking tokens. Since 2.5P the thinking has been insane. "I'm diving in to the problem", "I'm fully immersed" or "I'm meticulously crafting the answer"
I once saw "now that I've slept on it" in Gemini's CoT... baffling.
That's wild haha
Re: Gemini 3.1 Pro
#870Earlier quoted context omitted.
Google might be a mess now, but they have time. OpenAI and Anthropic are on barrowed time, Google has a built in money printer. They just need to outlast the others.
Plus they started making AI processors 11 years ago and invented the math behind “GPTs” 9 years ago. Gemini is way cheaper to run for them than it does for everyone else. I think Gemini is really built for their biggest market — Google Search. You ask questions and get answers. I’m sure they’ll figure out agentic flows. Google is always a mess when it comes to product. Don’t forget the Google chat sagas where it seem…
The modern generations are already starting to open up ChatGPT for basic questions. Not sure how long it’ll be their biggest market for.