Comment by A_D_E_P_T
15 days ago
I'm not the poster you responded to, but I can tell you that historically the Gemini models have lagged behind Anthropic (the clear leader) and OpenAI's best models where coding in particular is concerned. Opus 5.5 is, right now, the consensus best coding model.
That said, I'm extremely impressed with Argon thus far. I take back everything bad I've ever said about their AI strategy. Argon is very good and very fast. It might be competitive at coding, but it's too early to say.
Opus 5.5 medium is a real sweet spot for many many things. But. I got an unexpected refusal (for help creating a browser console script to convert a web-based streaming video to an offline-ready .mp4), which Opus 5.5 low happily provided.
Since Google owns YouTube, this refusal by Gemini seems suspiciously too aligned with their interests. Just a conspiracy theory, though :)
it does, but the refusal in OPs story was by Opus 5.5 medium, I think :)
4 replies →
I completely agree; I was really surprised to find that Claude Code Opus 5.5 is significantly better. I had spent quite a bit of time using Gemini Pro for coding tasks, but when I revisited the code analysis using Opus 5.5, it revealed quite a few shortcomings in Gemini's understanding... I code using Python, which is considered the best language for writing code via LLMs (I am referring to linguistic entropy).
Opus 5.5 routinely finds tons of bugs in code that Opus 5.5 wrote, so this may not reflect a difference in model capability.
Sounds like you were using the older Gemini 3.1 Pro from February, and not the new release this post is about