3 ms·

Also Gemini works absolutely fantastic right now. I find it provides better results for coding tasks compared to ChatGPT

logicallee 8mo ago
have you compared it with Claude Code at all? Is there a similar subscription model for Gemini as Claude? Does it have an agent like Claude Code or ChatGPT Codex? what are you using it for? How does it do with large contexts? (Claude AI Code has a 1 million token context).
- airstrike 8mo ago
  it's nowhere near claude opus but claude and claude code are different things
  - logicallee 8mo ago
    (Claude Code now runs claude opus, so they're not so different.) >it's [Gemini] nowhere near claude opus Could you be a bit more specific, because your sibling reply says "pretty close to opus performance" so it would help if you gave additional information about how you use it and how you feel the two compare. Thanks.
  - dudeinhawaii 8mo ago
    My take has been... Gemini 3.1 (and Gemini 3) are a lot smarter than Claude Opus 4.6 But... Gemini 3 series are both mediocre at best in agentic coding. Single shot question(s) about a code problem vs "build this feature autonomously". Gemini's CLI harness is just not very good and Gemini's approach to agentic coding leaves a lot to be desired. It doesn't perform the double-checking that Codex does, it's slower than Claude, it runs off and does things without asking and not clearly explaining why.
- landl0rd 8mo ago
  - yes, pretty close to opus performance - yes - yes (not quite as good as CC/Codex but you can swap the API instead of using gemini-cli) - same stuff as them - better than others, google got long (1mm) context right before anyone else and doesn't charge two kidneys, an arm, and a leg like anthropic
  - logicallee 8mo ago
    thanks for these answers.
- m-schuetz 8mo ago
  I tried Claude Opus but at least for my tasks, Gemini provided better results. Both were way better than ChatGPT. Haven't done any agents yet, waiting on that until they mature a bit more.
frde 8mo ago
Don't want to sound rude, but anytime anyone says this I assume they haven't tried using agentic coding tools and are still copy pasting coding questions into a web input box I would be really curious to know what tools you've tried and are using where gemini feels better to use
- m00x 8mo ago
  Gemini is a generalist model and works better than all existing models at generalist problems. Coding has been vastly improved in 3.0 and 3.1, but Google won't give us the full juice as Google usually does.
  - FartyMcFarter 8mo ago
    My guess is that Google has teams working on catching up with Claude Code, and I wouldn't be surprised if they manage to close the gap significantly or even surpass it. Google has the datasets, the expertise, and the motivation.
- f311a 8mo ago
  It's good enough if you don't go wild and allow LLMs to produce 5k+ lines in one session. In a lot of industries, you can't afford this anyway, since all code has to be carefully reviewed. A lot of models are great when you do isolated changes with 100-1000 lines. Sometimes it's okay to ship a lot of code from LLMs, especially for the frontend. But, there are a lot of companies and tasks where backend bugs cost a lot, either in big customers or direct money. No model will allow you to go wild in this case.
- gman83 8mo ago
  You need to stick Gemini in a straightjacket; I've been using https://github.com/ClavixDev/Clavix https://github.com/ClavixDev/Clavix. When using something like that, even something like Gemini 3 Flash becomes usable. If not, it more often than not just loses the plot.
- segfaultex 8mo ago
  Conversely, I have yet to see agentic coding tools produce anything I’d be willing to ship.
nobody_r_knows 8mo ago
ChatGTP isn't even meant for coding anymore, nor Gemini. It's OpenAI Codex vs Claude Code. Gemini doesn't even have an offering.
- deleted 8mo ago
  [deleted]
- pastjean 8mo ago
  opencode + gemini is pretty nicely working
- input_sh 8mo ago
  https://antigravity.google/ https://antigravity.google/ On top of every version of Gemini, you also get both Claude models and GPT-OSS 120B. If you're doing webdev, it'll even launch a (self-contained) Chrome to "see" the result of its changes. I haven't played around Codex, but it blows Claude Code's finicky terminal interface out of the water in my experience.
- m-schuetz 8mo ago
  And yet I got better results with Gemini than with Claude Opus.
kdheiwns 8mo ago
I've had the same experience with editing shaders. ChatGPT has absolutely no clue what's going on and it seems like it randomly edits shader code. It's never given me anything remotely usable. Gemini has been able to edit shaders and get me a result that's not perfect, but fairly close to what I want.

logicallee 8mo ago

have you compared it with Claude Code at all? Is there a similar subscription model for Gemini as Claude? Does it have an agent like Claude Code or ChatGPT Codex? what are you using it for? How does it do with large contexts? (Claude AI Code has a 1 million token context).

airstrike 8mo ago
it's nowhere near claude opus but claude and claude code are different things
- logicallee 8mo ago
  (Claude Code now runs claude opus, so they're not so different.) >it's [Gemini] nowhere near claude opus Could you be a bit more specific, because your sibling reply says "pretty close to opus performance" so it would help if you gave additional information about how you use it and how you feel the two compare. Thanks.
- dudeinhawaii 8mo ago
  My take has been... Gemini 3.1 (and Gemini 3) are a lot smarter than Claude Opus 4.6 But... Gemini 3 series are both mediocre at best in agentic coding. Single shot question(s) about a code problem vs "build this feature autonomously". Gemini's CLI harness is just not very good and Gemini's approach to agentic coding leaves a lot to be desired. It doesn't perform the double-checking that Codex does, it's slower than Claude, it runs off and does things without asking and not clearly explaining why.
landl0rd 8mo ago
- yes, pretty close to opus performance - yes - yes (not quite as good as CC/Codex but you can swap the API instead of using gemini-cli) - same stuff as them - better than others, google got long (1mm) context right before anyone else and doesn't charge two kidneys, an arm, and a leg like anthropic
- logicallee 8mo ago
  thanks for these answers.
m-schuetz 8mo ago
I tried Claude Opus but at least for my tasks, Gemini provided better results. Both were way better than ChatGPT. Haven't done any agents yet, waiting on that until they mature a bit more.

frde 8mo ago

Don't want to sound rude, but anytime anyone says this I assume they haven't tried using agentic coding tools and are still copy pasting coding questions into a web input box I would be really curious to know what tools you've tried and are using where gemini feels better to use

m00x 8mo ago
Gemini is a generalist model and works better than all existing models at generalist problems. Coding has been vastly improved in 3.0 and 3.1, but Google won't give us the full juice as Google usually does.
- FartyMcFarter 8mo ago
  My guess is that Google has teams working on catching up with Claude Code, and I wouldn't be surprised if they manage to close the gap significantly or even surpass it. Google has the datasets, the expertise, and the motivation.
f311a 8mo ago
It's good enough if you don't go wild and allow LLMs to produce 5k+ lines in one session. In a lot of industries, you can't afford this anyway, since all code has to be carefully reviewed. A lot of models are great when you do isolated changes with 100-1000 lines. Sometimes it's okay to ship a lot of code from LLMs, especially for the frontend. But, there are a lot of companies and tasks where backend bugs cost a lot, either in big customers or direct money. No model will allow you to go wild in this case.
gman83 8mo ago
You need to stick Gemini in a straightjacket; I've been using https://github.com/ClavixDev/Clavix https://github.com/ClavixDev/Clavix. When using something like that, even something like Gemini 3 Flash becomes usable. If not, it more often than not just loses the plot.
segfaultex 8mo ago
Conversely, I have yet to see agentic coding tools produce anything I’d be willing to ship.

nobody_r_knows 8mo ago

ChatGTP isn't even meant for coding anymore, nor Gemini. It's OpenAI Codex vs Claude Code. Gemini doesn't even have an offering.

deleted 8mo ago
[deleted]
pastjean 8mo ago
opencode + gemini is pretty nicely working
input_sh 8mo ago
https://antigravity.google/ https://antigravity.google/ On top of every version of Gemini, you also get both Claude models and GPT-OSS 120B. If you're doing webdev, it'll even launch a (self-contained) Chrome to "see" the result of its changes. I haven't played around Codex, but it blows Claude Code's finicky terminal interface out of the water in my experience.
m-schuetz 8mo ago
And yet I got better results with Gemini than with Claude Opus.

kdheiwns 8mo ago

I've had the same experience with editing shaders. ChatGPT has absolutely no clue what's going on and it seems like it randomly edits shader code. It's never given me anything remotely usable. Gemini has been able to edit shaders and get me a result that's not perfect, but fairly close to what I want.