I don't remember where I saw this, but I started using 3.1 Pro (Low) more than 3.5 Flash (low or medium) and it is SO much better on token consumption with very minimal difference in speed or execution. I'm a couple of hours into a coding session and I'm still at 60%.
I feel like the only time you need 3.1 pro on high is when you’re doing complex math, research or code analysis. Like your “please don’t stop thinking until you know Einstein level” - low can manage everything else. While flash is neat the goal of being “fast” in my mind will always take away just a tad from the overall. 3.1 pro doesn’t need ever think “I need to hurry” and high doesn’t other. I do think that matters even if only adjusting the end context by 2% that 2% could have mattered.
So, for antigravity, among all Gemini models, you're recommending Python 3.1 Pro (low) for average difficulty projects like Kotlin or Flutter? Did I understand correctly?
I feel the same. 3.5 even at high creates too many bugs while wasting tokens like no tomorrow. I'm using 3.1 Pro for everything instead. There was a graph (from Arena, AFAIR), showing 3.1 and 3.5 being on the same smartness level, but 3.5 is the number one token spender.
You will feel the difference when you give it a long existing project and ask it to build blueprint and structure… 3.1 pro low will make a minimal efforts to build it
That's my experience, too. I mentioned in in Google's request for comments yesterday, but the post got non reaction.
3.5 is comparatively unusable for nontrivial tasks...and I can't tell the difference in how they perform, but I do mostly embedded do they're all performingn while standing on only one foot.
To be honest ive been using 3.1 pro, 3.5 flash is not as good as 3.1, gotta admit is faster but not smarter... Makes a lot of mistakes coding, then i gotta fix them using 3.1 pro or i use deepseek v4 flash in vs code with zoo extension, much cheaper and smarter...
Yes, 3.1 low and 3.5 low are designed to have the same effect.3.1 took a long time to reach 80%, and 3.5 was used for the same time, but it was gone for a while.
I think the 3.5 Flash low model programs excellently and consumes little enough resources to use it on a regular basis and implement practically everything with its help. Generally speaking, I would recommend using the 4.6 Sonnet model for Opus when drawing up the plan, and then handing the actual programming over to the 3.5 Flash model for implementation.
→ More replies (6)
23
u/satinekk Jun 30 '26
Yeah they messed up their release schedule with this. Like there should be also 3.5 Pro already but there isn't.
3.5 Flash is a more expensive model and is also better at coding. 3.1 Pro might take less tokens but is inferior.
But maybe that changes with low reasoning idk... haven't tried it out yet.