upvote
But they make up for it by shipping it late.
reply
It's also got vision and audio. So, the better comparison is any of the other large Chinese open models that are better and cheaper than Gemini Flash.
reply
Google's models are always very well spoken and much more pleasant to talk to. And I've used the open weight models a lot, too.
reply
It's also about 15x faster.
reply
It's roughly equal on price and intelligence as GLM 5.2 while being ~8x faster.
reply
It’s multimodal though.
reply
> It’s multimodal though.

Sure.

And how does that make your day better? I know it does not improve my work in any way shape or form.

I'll take a better coding model that's not multi-modal any time.

If I need an LLM to do images or sound, I'd rather use a dedicated one instead of a jack-of-all-trades-master-of-none model.

reply
Personally, I often paste screenshots into Claude Code of the application it’s working on. And I’ve even had it work autonomously on something and regularly grab its own screenshots.

Or sometimes I will have tables, charts, or even screenshots of text that I would otherwise have to have another step to OCR or type out.

Multimodal saves me time on a regular basis. Not sure it’s a game changer, but just lets me communicate with the model in all sorts of ways that would be harder otherwise.

reply
At least 30% of my queries to an LLM include deciphering something from an image. If I’m coding pretty much a hundred percent of bugs include some sort of image.
reply
It'd be interesting to know how much the Intelligence as a Service angle serves as a value-add in the minds of Google's executives.

You can get decent open-weight models now. That's not difficult. The difficulty is 1) running them and 2) compliance.

My company runs Claude on GCP's Vertex AI solution. We're in the US healthcare IT space, so the models need to be from somewhere that American healthcare agencies and companies have traditionally been okay with sourcing code from - which means the US, Canada, and maybe Europe. The stuff that handles PHI/PII must be in the US. The expense of hosting is more of a PITA than most customers want to go through this early in the technology's lifecycle, and intelligence gains are simply a matter of degree for most business tasks.

In theory, we could find some open-weight model (likely from China) for our development agentic work and host it anywhere you can host AI models. We don't, though, and I think Google, OpenAI/Microsoft, and Anthropic see that as the core of their business.

reply
Is that statement based on token price? More and more it seems that $/token hides as much as it reveals. Token efficiency, tokenizer differences, etc. I'm not saying that you are wrong, I am just saying it is becoming a bit more difficult making statements like this without a bit more research.
reply
It's based on the Artificial Analysis "Intelligence Index vs. Cost per Intelligence Index Task" here:

https://artificialanalysis.ai/#intelligence-comparison-tabs

Differences in token "density" are accounted for by pricing per task

reply