Gemini 3.7 Flash

<- Back

Gemini 3.7 Flash

thisisauserid

Comments (261)

jjcm
Here's a image->html test. Gemini has always swung above its weight class for vision work, so I'm always eager to try it with this.Original images: https://image.non.io/neonRamenDesigns.webpGemini 3.7 build: https://html.non.io/neonRamenGemini3.7Opus 5 build for comparison: https://html.non.io/neonRamenOpus is still best in class for this, but it's worth noting how well Gemini 3.7 does vs a more comparable LLM price wise, which is Grok 4.6: https://html.non.io/neonRamenGrok4.6 . I thought Gemini would blow Grok out of the water (it generally has in the past), but Grok has really caught up.
simonw
The "introductory pricing" for this 3.7 Flash model is really weird.It's scheduled to double in price on December 31, 2026, but who would anticipate still using this model five months from now? Especially since 3.6 Flash came out just three weeks ago!My first effort with default thinking level produced an ambitious pelican, let down by a flawed bicycle: https://tools.simonwillison.net/markdown-svg-renderer#url=ht...Then I ran it on high, medium and low thinking levels (oddly minimal is no longer an option, which WAS an option for 3.5 and 3.6) and got a pretty excellent pelican for the first two:https://tools.simonwillison.net/markdown-svg-renderer.html#u...UPDATE: That was in Safari, but as pointed out in the replies here the pelicans do NOT render well in Firefox or Chrome! Best guess is that's because of this invalid filter in the SVG: <filter id="shadow" x="-10%" y="-10%" width="130%" height="130%"></filter> Filters are meant to contain additional elements, not be empty: https://drafts.csswg.org/filter-effects/#FilterElement - so maybe Chrome and Firefox remove the element that references the broken filter but Safari doesn't?
Alifatisk
Ever since the insane discount with GPT-5.6 Luna, not much excites me anymore. I mean just look at the benchmarks, even though Gemini 3.7 Flash performs well on the DeepSWE 1.1, Luna (Max) still performs way better. I personally have stuck to Luna (Xhigh) because its been more than enough and does not bloat up the context window too fast with reasoning tokens.https://deepswe.datacurve.ai> Starting January 1, 2027, $1.50/1M input tokens and $7.50/1M output tokens will apply.Compare this to Luna which is at $0.2/1M input ($0.02 cached) and $1.2/1M output.https://developers.openai.com/api/docs/models/gpt-5.6-luna
wxw
They need to release benchmarks against Luna/Terra. Luna is much cheaper which feels like it undercuts the need for Flash.I've always considered the Flash series of models to be for low-cost, high-volume, mostly text-based use cases (e.g. summarization, parsing, formatting), emphasis on low-cost.[edit: ah, benchmarks here: https://blog.google/innovation-and-ai/models-and-research/ge...more of a Terra than Luna competitor which is an interesting positioning. I feel like differentiation at the mid-tier of models is pretty difficult.]
twelvechairs
https://artificialanalysis.ai/models/gemini-3-7-flashThe selling point for gemini continues to be speed and particularly end-to-end response time.
parasti
Actual announcement: https://blog.google/innovation-and-ai/models-and-research/ge...So it's better than 3.6 Flash, at half the price. I've been pretty excited about Gemini models recently, they just feel so fast after spending most of the day at work waiting for Opus 5.
euazOn
The multimodal abilities are great, but if you deal with text only, what is the benefit of using this over DS V4 Flash/Pro? 13-26x cheaper with comparable intelligence, and available across many different inference providers.I fail to see the usecase where DS V4 Pro is not enough, but Flash 3.7 is - except multimodal.Luna is similar, and also 8x cheaper. Source: artificialanalysisThe only benefit I can see is the speed, that looks to be outstanding, probably thanks to their TPUs.
fmind-dev
Gemini Flash is one of the best "good-enough" models. I use this type of model daily, for automation and quick development iteration loops.Unfortunately, it's often not strong enough for heavy refactoring and long running development loops.
sid_talks
The Gemini Flash models makes perfect sense to me coming from a company like Google. Google AI Mode for search is a product I really find useful. It makes sense that Google focused on smaller, faster yet smart enough models that wouldn't break your bank on inference. It plays well into their product ecosystem.Google AI Mode consistently gets me consistently good results and good speeds. It really changes what "googling" is for me.
Topfi
> What's new in Gemini 3.7 Flash [0]> Coding and agentic tasks: Significantly higher quality on real-world software engineering and agentic benchmarks, improving issue resolution and reducing failed agent loops.> Web development and stronger design parity: Generates higher-fidelity desktop and web application code directly from design mocks, with strong gains in design adherence and in auditing existing codebases against mocks to verify 1:1 design parity.> Promotional pricing: Gemini 3.7 Flash will be available at an introductory price of $0.75/1M input tokens and $3.75/1M output tokens. We’re also applying this new rate to 3.6 Flash. Introductory pricing expires on December 31, 2026; after, $1.50/1M input tokens and $7.50/1M output tokens will apply.Still no sign of 3.5 Pro. Will have to test it, low expectations given every other model from the Gemini 3 lineage, but one can hope. Just struggle to understand the promotional pricing being temporary for four months. Given this industry, I'd be hard pressed if 3.7 Flash was still in use by end of year, so why not make it the official pricing?[0] https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/latest-model
ksajadi
i just wish google cloud ux was remotely as good as their models. they made some progress with their studio, but then in a true google fashion, product names keep changing (Gemini, Anti-gravity, Vertex, Google AI,...) as well as confusion and complexity for something as simple as registering agy cli with a Google cloud project.today i wanted to link agy to a google cloud project, for that i had to enable 5 different APIs in google cloud UI, then create a subscription for Gemini Enterprise (whatever that is), then link it to a project, then assign it to a user. and after all that, agy couldn't find the subscription.the best part: i couldn't cancel the subscription. so i just paid $35 for one month and left it.
ls_stats
I don't get it, Google could heavily subsidy their Gemini models to make it more attractive, but they prefer to not do it. I don't know one soul who is using Gemini models to code. Even OpenAI who doesn't have money or capacity is offering their Luna model at $1.2 per 1M/out.
dwa3592
I was going to cancel my gemini membership today ..... still going ahead. In my experience, gemini 3.1 pro, 3.5, 3.6 flash constantly lie too much about completing their tasks whereas sol (even though equally dumb) never claims something has been done when it hasn't been.
damsta
> 3.7 Flash is available through the end of the year at an introductory price of $0.75/1M input tokens and $3.75/1M output tokens.> Introductory pricing expires on December 31, 2026. Starting January 1, 2027, $1.50/1M input tokens and $7.50/1M output tokens will apply.
eckr
Maybe this is just my experience, but have people had trouble with 3.6 Flash just... getting things it has seen in its context correct? I don't know if it's been insanely benchmaxxed or what, but it'll pull information from websites and immediately get it wrong the token after. Or for example (this is something that happened like yesterday) I asked it to compare the uses of A and B in a language I was learning, and the way I typed it was "Please compare how these two are compared differently: A VS B", and then... it proceeded to compare "VS" and "B". I'm not kidding.Personally whenever I use Gemini I've just been using 3.1 Pro because I've had insane trouble with them getting things incorrect like this. Hopefully they'll fix it soon / they've fixed it with 3.7 Flash.
nickandbro
This is genuinely a competitive model, considering it beats Claude Sonnet 5 on almost all benchmarks and is more than half its price. Seems like Google is back in the game, though not leading the frontier anymore.
bisonbear
They compare it to 5.6 Terra, however https://cognition.com/frontiercode puts Terra at about 1/2 the priceAlso have to compare to the recent Grok 4.6 release, which appears to straight up be better AND cheaperHard to understand why anyone would choose 3.7 Flash under these conditions.. is Deepmind still a frontier lab?
axus
It's on Google AI Studio, which I use for free when I'm not on computers I control.It did fine on my usual benchmark about configuring old Sparc hardware, maybe output slightly faster than before. Even included something new to check in the firmware.
kyruzic
So at this point new models seem to only care about one task, software development. This really was not the original pitch of ai and I do not see how it justifies the insane spend or valuations it has produced.
Tiberium
3.7 Flash gets 56 on AA up from 52 for 3.6 Flash. But it seems like this is at the cost of more output tokens per task: 3.6 Flash is 26k, 3.7 Flash is 37k. Due to 3.7 Flash's 2x slashed pricing it's still cheaper per task.
dudeinhawaii
I want to like Gemini models but my problem thus far has been a lack of coding chops. They still make mistakes, importantly, without correcting them for things like hallucinated API calls or code that doesn't run but they never bothered building or running. I know a lot of this can be fixed with workflows but it still feels like a failing.GPT-5.6 or Claude models haven't delivered to me non-running code in ages.Whenever I have Gemini in the flow, it's fast, but mistake riddled. I have low confidence in the output.I've had some success with Opus driving Gemini models. It's pointless for GPT family since Sol is cheap enough or can drive terra/luna for arguably better performance, same speed, and better outcome.As for all of the talk in this thread about modalities. Every SOTA model takes screenshots and verifies work now. Grok-4.6 does this, Luna does it, etc. They can also all work _from_ a screen shot or mockup provided.I don't think it's a major selling point when every model can do it well and reasonably fast.That said, eagerly awaiting "pro" and improvements to antigravity.
cracadumi
For those looking for the full benchmark figures and technical overview, Google's primary announcement post is here: https://blog.google/innovation-and-ai/models-and-research/ge...
npn
> * For 3.6 and 3.7 Flash, introductory price expires on December 31, 2026. Starting January 1, 2027, $1.50/1M input tokens and $7.50/1M output tokens will apply.this is hilarious. it is not 2025 any more, by Jan 2027 there will be at least 3 newer generation of models (from other provider) released already. nobody would use flash 3.7 at that time.sure we used to cling to gemini models in the past, demanding 2.5 models to continue to serve, but since google betrayed us with those price hike, people already spent their time making their production pipeline less dependent on google since then.heck, even now I'm not sure I even care if they cut the pricing even lower. there are too many models with cheaper price and similar performance now.
spelk
>3.7 Flash is available through the end of the year at an introductory price 1 of $0.75/1M input tokens and $3.75/1M output tokens. This price combined with the enhanced model performance enables developers and customers to scale production-ready agents cost effectively.Introductory pricing until December 2026 implies no significant Gemini Flash developments until the next year.
ghoshbishakh
Has anyone noticed that antigravity has been working really well for the last few weeks. Now with this model it should be working much better. Hope the Google AI Pro Subscription can be used to do some real agentic coding now.
theplumber
So they keep pushing these Flash models because they don’t really have a powerful model…or better said their ‘pro’ model is actually a flash
fryanyway_swe
I just use web chat as "harness"(lol) or interface and I have mostly switched to Gemini as the free limit basically never run out for me unlike ChatGPT and Claude.Also impressed with Grok for some stuff.
bisonbear
Reposting my comment from the other thread https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49288847They compare it to 5.6 Terra, however https://cognition.com/frontiercode puts Terra at about 1/2 the priceAlso have to compare to the recent Grok 4.6 release, which appears to straight up be better AND cheaperHard to understand why anyone would choose 3.7 Flash under these conditions.. is Deepmind still a frontier lab?
sarjann
Introductory price seems a bit weird as it expires at the end of the year and by then it’s going to be significantly outdated.
nateb2022
[dupe] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49288847 (35 points, 8 comments)
stillpointlab
Does Google believe people want fast models because they have some sort of evidence of that preference? Or are they no longer capable of delivering a Pro model?
throwaw12
Is this the reason why Jeff Dean, Sanjay Ghemawat and other DeepMing, Gemini people got kicked out of Google?If so, now I understand why they didn't want to release this model
orliesaurus
what a week - lets see it draw a weird animal doing a weird thing on a bicycle
pkoird
When are we getting another pro model from Gemini? Or are they simply focusing on the niche of fast but moderately capable models?
anon
undefined
9cb14c1ec0
Model card: https://deepmind.google/models/model-cards/gemini-3-7-flash/Somewhere in the same neighborhood as GPT 5.6 Tera and Sonnet 5, depending on the bench.
rodolphoarruda
Did the company fix the high friction between any service and their models' API?I hope so. It seems mind boggling to me that an user needs to surf around different sections (plural) of google cloud console, then this Vertex and do a dozen clicks to issue a simple key.
algoth1
Well, you do get 1 million tokens and the ability to reason over video natively and many of us are forced to pay for 20usd plan anyway due to google drive 5TB, not to mention notebooklm, so it’s not a nothing burguer, it’s just an almost nothing burguer
bartman
At the discounted rates, upgrading from 3 Flash to 3.7 Flash is finally reasonable.In my evals 3.6 Flash (pre price change) was usually a bit more token efficient than 3 Flash, so I‘m expecting same or even lower cost-per-task on 3.7.Maybe a play by Google to deprecate 3 Flash soon.
khanhnguyen8386
Offering a 'temporary introductory discount' until Dec 2026 on an LLM is hilarious. In this market, by Jan 2027 this model will be superseded by 5 different providers offering 10x the performance at half the post-discount price anyway.
nomilk
How does it compare to Opus 5.0 and Fable 5 for coding? E.g. in Cursor or OpenCode?
nipunaeka89
Always loved the Gemini. Helped my work alot
andai
So their "Flash" model won't be cheap. Are they gonna make a new one that's cheaper? Gemini-3.8-Silverlight? ;)
impulser_
After being stuck with using GPT-5.6 models for the past few weeks, I have renewed faith in Google and everyone but OpenAI. The GPT-5.6 models are quite obviously benchmarkmaxxed to make they seem like they are intelligent but they are quite dumb outside anything that not a benchmarked task.I also think Google is still the best at fitting the most overall intelligences into their models, but for some reason it seems like the model architecture is just bad.
IFC_LLC
Like, I understand everything, but by this time I don't give anything about any of those announcements.Theoretically there is some difference between Fable and Opus or Grok and GPT, but at the end of the day I'd look at the bottom left of my screen and to my amusement find out that for the past 3-4 hours I've been using model ______.If the results are semi-decent, I'd keep it on, if not - I'd randomly switch the model and try again.Actual thing that would affect my selection would be a number of unused tokens I have left for a model ____ for this week.Maybe it's cause I'm using those for programming and log parsing and all of them are decent enough, but other than that - there are no leaps I see.
ur-whale
Why does Google keep announcing these subpar models?What am I missing?They can't seem to be able to produce a frontier model, fine.Just be quiet about it and work hard until you manage to put one together.[EDIT]: Come to think of it. Maybe they're trying to build the Toyota corolla of AI ... let's see if that wins them the battle long term. I personally doubt it.
yanis_t
Is that he model that supposed to be Pro, but then they changed their mind?
cmrdporcupine
So, again with a Flash model. Why are they so afraid to put out an actual SOTA frontier high intelligence model?We still don't have a 3.5 Pro, and along comes 3.7 Flash?!
keketi
In August of 2026, Gemini became self-aware, and began producing increasingly crappy flash versions of itself...
brendong
Glad to see that the company with the most data is releasing the most amount of models. Some things do make sense
TekMol
I'm only interested in the state-of-the-art model by each provider.For Google, this is still gemini-3.1-pro-preview, right?
tosh
strong improvement over 3.6 flashbut luna is hard to beat @ capability / cost
andrewstuart
Gemini has lost the race to be relevant for AI coding.
greatgib
For almost every section in the model card there is the message: Gemini 3.7 Flash is based on Gemini 3.6 Flash.Same training dataset, same software, same hardware, same architecture...I'm wondering what they changed actually for the model to be more powerful if the benchmark results are real and relevant.Maybe just tweak settings or the reasoning prompts and called it a new version of their model?
eis
Grok, Meta, Gemini and others all released updates to their models within around a month or two from their respective last release and made significant jumps in benchmarks all around the same time. Any guesses as to why that is? Is it just the release season and/or everyone is benchmaxxing?
anon
undefined
jdw64
I'm really curious about this: the foundational paper behind today's LLMs came from Google, and some of the world's best scientists were at Google. So why are they falling so far behind in the AI race?
anon
undefined
smeltworks
[flagged]
bunkydoo
[dead]
AntonioEritas
Another failed 3.5 pro run branded as 3.7 flash. It's getting sad.
jespinel
IMO, they should drop their previous model (3.6 Flash) from the benchmark charts. I don't care how better this is compared with their previous model. What matters (to me) is:1. How the new model performs against the other top models in the same category.2. The pricing of the new model against the other top models in the same category.