Comment by gundmc

13 hours ago

There are numerous benchmarks that measure cost per task, which factors out tokens entirely. Gemini 3.8 flash is significantly lower than Sol on basically all of them

https://artificialanalysis.ai/#cost-tabs

That said, Luna is the undisputed king here at the moment and is what I use as my workhorse model.

I don't know if my code is just "complex", but I find that Luna on max ignores the surrounding style and completely ignores logical consequences of a change, like just writing `del arg1, del arg2, ...` instead of dropping it from the surrounding code. All LLMs make questionable decisions at times, but Luna requires so much guidance that it's faster to just type it out yourself. What kind of routine tasks can one accomplish with such a model?

>There are numerous benchmarks that measure cost per task, which factors out tokens entirely. Gemini 3.8 flash is significantly lower than Sol on basically all of them https://artificialanalysis.ai/#cost-tabs

Not sure if you read your own link but Sol 56 high ranks smack between Gemini 3.8 flash medium and high. Gemini 3.8 flash comes in as more expensive per task than Sol 56 high according to artificial analysis.

Luna high is literally 30X cheaper than Gemini 3.8 flash high.

You can limit the model viewer and they're getting better at testing multiple effort levels now: https://artificialanalysis.ai/?models=gpt-5-6-sol-medium%2Cg...

One reason is clear: Sol uses dramatically fewer output tokens than Gemini 38 flash https://artificialanalysis.ai/?models=gemini-3-8-flash%2Cgem...

  • I open the link and I see Flash 3.8 high at 0.58 and Sol at 0.95. I don't understand why you say that "Sol 56 high ranks smack between Gemini 3.8 flash medium and high" but that is clearly wrong.

It's so funny how many people diverge on the same model.

Ps. For the last week I diverged to Luna too, still need to check 3.8 flash.

But 3.6 flash was my go-to model 3 weeks ago and before it was deepseek flash/pro for a while.

None of the claude models seemed cost effective though.