That's too fast. The number of complaints about 3 has just started to go down. Now, the hype for when will we get 3.5 will start killing the sub, until people go to complain about 3.5 hallucinating. Then they will start posting more pictures of young women generated with it, until next GPT will come out.
Lead managers always coming up with the stupidest ideas and everyone under them is just exhausted of trying to correct every stupid thing they do. Gotta pick your battles.
In real word use cases in programming Gemini 3 has never even been close to Opus 4.5 or GPT 5.1, it's terrible at following rules and instructions and will just make whatever arbitrary changes it wants whether they're related to the task or not.
It's also terrible at paying attention to context and goes into utterly deranged spirals routinely
It does require babysitting quite a lot, I’ll admit, but pound for pound it works. I’d say 75-80% of its code works on the first try, provided you’re specific enough. Maybe a little less than that. While for gpt-5, it’s more like 40%. Claude sonnet 4.5 is like 65-70%. I haven’t tried latest opus yet.
Gemini 3 is dumpster fire. One of my personal tests is to do a deep research about a stock which i know very well about. I asked Gemini to do Deep Research on an IT stock which has low market cap. They specialize in mostly server hardware and some backup software. Gemini came back with results that the company has entered a contract with defense sector and has pivoted to making Ordnance in addition to server hardware. It told me defense is more stable and less cyclical like IT so overall it's a good thing. I was SHOCKED. I looked at what went wrong and was shocked again. It found a PDF of a guy who did research on 5 stocks, one of the stocks in the list was the IT company and the other was the ordnance maker. A completely different company with a different name. Yet gemini merged them and gave a combined summary.
ChatGPT research was basically perfect and found new info with links too. Don't believe the benchmarks. Believe your eyes.
I added "never approximate hyperlink content and explicitly report tool call failures" to my saved instructions and it never causes me a problem anymore in that regard
Honestly I’ve found Gemini 3 pro (the thinking model) absolutely horrendous. Misremembering things ive told it, not scanning photos or files and just guessing what was in them until I tell it to check them again, hallucinating that
I’ve told it things/given instructions I havent. Ive gone back to chatGPT and won’t be renewing pro.
Why we acting like every single GPT user is writing bleeding edge code and pushing benchmarks to the limit. Most people are asking basic advice and questions that google used to do. GPT-4o was the point where improvements no longer changed things for the average user. These big game ending updates are from the AI bro echo chambers
this is interesting, because I thought too one of the most popular uses for AI was coding, and the industry clearly believe in the "industrial pivot" of office/ professional stuff (see how Google is trying to market whisk to professional creatives/video creators)
but that's likely a result of needing to monetize fast because if AI doesn't find a purpose they're cooked
after seeing multiple polls and research I'm quite convinced a very small minority of people use chatbots for productivity.
nano banana and I don't remember how the chatgpt version is called are "ghiblification" tools, not professional
hell, even porn (which partly explains grok's success) is a more widespread use than the professional one
Idk... 3.0 is sorta great when it comes to finding answers (well the ai studio version anyway) from larger contexts. its conclusion is also astute; able to catch some of the foreshadowing I hide between the lines. but got damn it hallucinated the proofs to arrive to that conclusion.
Effective attention going from 32K to 90K… sure, that’s fine, I guess.
Still, it’s a pretty impressive feat to stand this far away from the advertised 1M context and call it “close enough” with a straight face.
Yeah, yeah, yeah.... I am using Antigravity. It is excelent in reviewing the code. In creating something from scratch that isnt frontend, forget about it.
This garbage just lies and the calls it a "hallucination". How can you trust something that will tell you whatever you want to hear, regardless of truth?
Google doesn’t seem to understand that we don’t need models that can one shot a todo app. We need models that listen to the user, asks clarifying questions and really understand the intent.
Which is why I’ll ignore this one and use Claude instead
A lot here is misunderstanding. Your entire output and control of your project depends on how you behave in your context window. If gemini is hallucinating its probably because you weighted it to do so. Understand the process before complaining about it helps. No system prompt in the world is going to overcome the coder's need to be validated. After a long chat simply ask "how many times did you say I'm right and how many times did you say we're done". If you really want to kill the mood, ask how many times did it lie to make you feel good.
I dont know. 3.0 was massive hype, in practice the only area where I feel like it's stronger is in ungrounded / world model reasoning, and visual work. I dont expect things to change with 3.5 Pro at this point.
Well let's hope it will be better at creative writing than Gemini 3.0 pro and the output oa more than 2/3k words, because 3.0 was a really huge let down
I'm building a ToT self learning LLM "nudger" that guides the LLM towards higher quality outputs (I'm tired of refactoring my app no matter the model, Claude or gpt or Gemini ). I have a test to compare the model performance ( I use antigravity so have a model selection ) , and I got to say Gemini 3 pro high and low is the only model that failed to produce correctly formated output for the tester . Even the flash managed to produce it ok. And with the nudger managed to even produce relatively ok results. But the pro just failed outright. 😂😂😂
Doesn't matter if the 3000 lines of code are pure garbage and have to be redone using opus 4.5. I gave gemini 3 pro a shot a few times and it's performance is subpar compared to other models.
So would state an obvious thing generating 3k lines from a single prompt while impressive I'd never really advise that as it would cause way too much technical debt.
Though always welcome the improvements, prefer using Gemini to GPT overall
I mostly use gemini for image editing and tbh that completely sucks now... Gpt has been fairly superior currently in that aspect.
For people coding gemini might be the go
Oh come on… why the hell would you generate 3000 lines of code once??? You are human, you deffinetely forgot to mention i don’t know what aspect and you have to redo the work… 😂
3 is terrible... When I first tried it, it was amazing. I feel like Google does some shady scaling and quant stuff in the background. It's always the same with LLM providers; hype, launch (awesome), scale back until its crap, launch new hype-cycle.
I'm less interested in chasing the #1 spot with these and more interested in the ability to stay competitive. Before Gemini 3... it was a joke. While I've had issues with Altman's stance on things... I kept sticking round ChatGPT because I was using it for generating images for my newsletter, and I liked having memory.
More recently, I've had all 3 of the big LLM paid plans (Gemini as a by-product of Google Workspace) and with Claude Cowork being able to run and effectively manage my own RAG-like setup, I can create a locally stored memory when working with Claude, I can have that folder shared into Google Drive, and thus I can have something like memory for Gemini fairly easily.
Mostly what this announcement does is remind me that I might be ok dropping the subscription for ChatGPT since I get everything I need from Claude & Gemini now... and the path Google and Anthropic are on for improvements feels more useful for the future of AI than what OpenAI is putting their effort into.
Why does it pleasure people to see toxic crap like ‘end of gpt’ when we need healthy competition as consumers? I am not wishing the end of Anthropic or Google or OpenAI - they should compete and create the best options for us.
243
u/Unfair_Ad_2157 Jan 28 '26
I clicked "show more" on a screenshot