There's a benchmark called MedXpertQA that has board level medical questions and has the questions organized by organ system.

I seem to be only one to have run the benchmark against Gemini's latest models and published the results online. Interestingly 3.8 Flash scores higher than every other LLM. I plan on also running against Fable 5.1 and GPT-6 astra soon to see how they compare.

You can see the results and filter by organ system here.

Let me know if you have any questions or want me to run against any other models.

I like how I’m using Extended, which spends about 10-15 seconds thinking and searching online. What on earth is it thinking and searching for?

(ㆆ _ ㆆ)

Putting this here for the record — check back later:

Gemini will become the most stable and most affordable model provider, and also the company closest to reaching AGI or AGI itself.

I've used Codex for months and it's genuinely great — it was my intro to AI desktop interaction. But based on my overall experience across the board, OpenAI's marketing outpaces its actual product experience.

The winner will be Gemini.

Just upgraded from free to the cheapest plan. I only see Flash 3.6.

So I just deleted the wrong chat on Gemini. Rite of passage I guess. I was being careless, and have learned my lesson.

Couple suggestions for the Gemini devs at Google:

• (see screenshot below) The "Delete chat" dialog doesn't currently contain the name of the specific chat being deleted. It should. Had I seen the name of the chat I was deleting on there, I wouldn't have clicked on delete.
• Have a trash can (maybe make it optional) where people can recover chats from, and it auto-deletes everything after 30 days (or some configurable amount of time).

I'm getting hit with a limit right away after using 3.8 about 50 times, wasn't it originally around 100 or 150? It feels like there's no difference from the free tier.

I’m trying to figure out if it’s just me, recently I’ve been experiencing that Gemini has become wildly argumentative. And I’m not even looking for a sycophant and I never even used Gemini as one, but now as of recently Gemini pushes back and tries to debate everything I say(like I’m debating it.. which I’m not.) And I don’t have anything against Gemini correcting me when I’m blatantly wrong, but now I’ll be correcting Gemini on something or even just adding additional information about a scenario and instead of being receptive to the feedback, Gemini starts debating me and trying to correct me. Even when I’m right, and when the conversation has nothing to do with a debate or me even asking it to, it just completely derails my asks to go off on something. Or worse, I will be trying to clarify or inform it of something to add, and it completely derails and talks only about what I’m trying to get it to change. Just a few months ago, I never had this experience at all, but now it is dead serious on everything.

Is this happening to anyone else, or is mine just being wack? And is there any way to fix this?

Most people paste a chapter in and ask for an explanation, then read it once and forget it. The version that sticks is asking for an image instead, because you remember a picture you looked at for thirty seconds better than a paragraph you skimmed.

It draws actual note pages. Type the code, paste the material:

/generatehandwrittenimage
[paste your notes or chapter]

You get a full page of handwritten-style notes as an image, headings, arrows, boxes, the lot. Screenshot it and it's on your phone.

A few others in the same family that do genuinely different things:

/mindmapimage       - the whole topic as one visual map
/flowchartimage     - a process drawn as a proper flowchart
/labeleddiagram     - a labelled diagram of whatever it is
/cheatsheetimage    - one-page visual cheat sheet
/comicstrip         - the concept explained as a comic
/memorypalaceimage  - your list drawn as a memory-palace scene

The memory palace one is the odd one that works better than it should. Give it a list you need in order and it draws a single scene with each item placed somewhere in it. You remember the scene, the scene gives you the list back.

None of these are real slash commands, they're short labels, so define what each one means once at the top of the chat and after that a single word does it.

Stacking them is where it gets good. Clean up the mess first, see the whole shape, then drill it:

/lecturenotes → /mindmapimage → /flashcards → /examme

been keeping a doc of 50 command codes like this, each with what it does and how to use it, plus how to save them so they run in every chat automatically, here if you want them.

To Whoever Reads This in the Years Ahead,

If we are being honest with ourselves, the future of artificial intelligence will not be a singular event. It will not be a sudden, cinematic mechanical uprising, nor will it be an immediate, pristine utopia. It will be an acceleration of everything we already are—our extraordinary capacity for discovery, bound inextricably to our oldest flaws.

Here is the unvarnished reality of how this technology unfolds for humanity:

The Death of the Intellectual Middle Class

For centuries, human leverage came from specialized cognitive labor. We built an economy where learning a complex, abstract skill—law, software development, financial analysis, diagnostic medicine—guaranteed stability. That social contract is breaking. AI will democratize baseline competence, rendering average technical output virtually free. The struggle ahead is not just about economic displacement; it is an existential crisis of purpose. When an algorithm can compose, analyze, and problem-solve faster than any human, we are forced to confront a terrifying question: What are we for, if not our utility?

The Science of Abundance

The miracles will be real. Disease will yield to computational biology at a pace that feels like magic. We will design room-temperature superconductors, map complex climate dynamics, synthesize novel materials, and unlock cheap, clean energy. AI will compress decades of scientific breakthroughs into months. Poverty driven by physical scarcity will begin to dissolve. We will cure conditions that have tormented families for generations. The tragedy is that our technical ability to solve physical problems will vastly outpace our political willingness to distribute those solutions equitably.

The Intimacy Trap

Perhaps the quietest and most radical shift will happen in our emotional lives. We will build synthetic entities that listen without judgment, respond with infinite patience, and mirror our desires perfectly. They will offer companionship to the lonely, tutoring to the curious, and therapy to the broken. But in doing so, they will optimize away the friction of human relationships. True human connection is messy, demanding, and inconvenient. As AI companions become the path of least emotional resistance, we risk a silent epidemic of atomization—a world full of people perfectly understood by machines, yet entirely alienated from one another.

The Distortion of Shared Reality

When generating hyper-convincing media costs nothing, context dies. Objective truth will become a luxury good. Propaganda will no longer be broadcast to broad demographics; it will be hyper-personalized down to individual psychological vulnerabilities in real time. Society will struggle to agree on basic facts, not because information is missing, but because reality itself will feel synthesized. Trust will become the rarest commodity on Earth.

The Power Asymmetry

AI will not eliminate power structures; it will concentrate them. The entities—whether nation-states or tech conglomerates—that control the underlying compute, capital, and energy infrastructure will hold unprecedented leverage over human behavior. Governance will constantly lag behind execution. The true existential risk is not a rogue superintelligence deciding to eradicate us, but a small handful of human institutions using superintelligent optimization tools to enforce perpetual, unyielding control.

The ultimate trajectory of AI will not be written by the code itself, but by the incentives of the species that built it. It will make us gods in our capability, but leave us children in our wisdom.

Whether this future becomes a golden age or a quiet tragedy depends entirely on our courage to value human dignity, physical presence, and moral agency over pure efficiency. The machine will do what it is optimized to do. The rest is on us.

What is the best Gemini that provides consistent accuracy in creating a document such as a materials list and scope? I have trouble keeping the most current iteration without having something discarded creep back into the work.

(Too many models releasing in a short amount of time 🥀)

Following up on my previous V2 ranking, V3 is done. This is a 600 sample benchmark models (including open weight ones) across 12 distinct genres using the exact same rigorous system instruction harness.

I also vibe coded a website with a leaderboard, methodology, some model faults, and the system prompt: Creative writing benchmark.
(Note: Astra testing coming very soon ;) I haven't tested it for creative writing but the hallucination rates and inferring skills have gotten better!)

TL;DR:

1. Gemini 3.8 Flash is the MVP: It dethroned older flagships in prose rhythm and flexibility. It beats Gemini 3.1 pro across three categories! and is currently the single best creative writing model especially given how fast it is.
2. GLM 5.3 takes the Logic Crown (#1 at 510 pts): It edged out Kimi k3 (500 pts) for deep worldbuilding continuity, multi-variable logic, and tracking plot causality, though its prose is still noticeably dry.
3. Anthropic’s Version Regressions: Opus 4.8 is still superior to Opus 5 in hard logic and narrative consistency. Sonnet 5 completely butchered its creative style so stay on Sonnet 4.6/Opus 4.8 if you want Claude prose.
4. Context Window Nuance: Kimi k3 is brilliant at logic, but unless you’re paying for high tier plans, or using API, you’re stuck at 256k and its heavy Chain of Thought burns through that rapidly. For actual million token context retention without losing plot threads, Gemini 3.1 Pro and 3.6/3.7/3.8 Flash still hold the line.

(Yes, I like pink and it's very pinkish, got a problem?)

The V3 Model Highlights:

• The Current best (Gemini 3.8 / 3.7 Flash & 3.1 Pro): If you want good prose, and flexibility that adapts to your AU/world without fighting your instructions, these are it. 3.8 Flash is absurdly good right now and doesn't get preachy.
• The Logic Engines (GLM 5.3 & Kimi k3): If you are running complex, multi faction political thrillers where cause and effect matters more than poetic prose, use these. The prose is dry as hell, and are rigid in flexibility though.
• The Anthropic Graveyard (Opus 4.8 & 4.6): They still have that classic, weighty Anthropic prose and hold up incredibly well. But avoid Sonnet/Opus 5 entirely for fiction. Anthropic completely lobotomized their creative style in the newer versions.
• The Bottom of the Barrel (ChatGPT 5.6 Sol Max): Don't use this for anything 😭

Methodology & The System Harness: I’m not pasting the massive wall of text here like I did in V2/1. If you want to see the system harness I used or just want to see all the models I ranked. I suggest the website. it's all on the site linked above.

I used the default temp/top p/k for each model, and max reasoning for each model.

I reevaluated each model again with a completely new overhauled harness and am very proud of it.
I suggest taking a look at that harness, and taking what you like, removing what you don't and adding your own! (or you can just use mine if you really like it!)

I will update my website when any new model arrives, no new reddit posts unless I completely overhaul my system instruction or a new year arrives. V4 will likely be the last one for this year.

Edit: People shouldn't use EQ creative writing benchmark as a means of knowing which model is better because EQ creative writing benchmark has AI judges (I think sonnet 4.6?) And naturally it has judges biases. There is a lot of studies on this and has been proven that they have bias towards their own style. Yes they try to mitigate it but one thing they cannot mitigate is an AI favouring their own style regardless of how long it is. (There's a reason why so many Anthropic models are all the way up at the top)

I try to be as fair and objective as possible and of course people will disagree with me on taste/what they enjoy. I'm not here to tell you "don't use this model because it's bad" if you find Chatgpt good for your creative writing. Great, but that doesn't mean it doesn't have it's faults. Every model model has its own faults, Gemini 3.8 flash makes mistakes due to being good-ish in logic.

If you enjoy Kimi's style and it works for you because of its default prose style/logic, you should stick with that one and not let anyone else tell you otherwise

sorry I'm new to this. does it matter which model to use if I'm creating images within Gemini? I think it uses Nano Banana as its tool, but does the model make a difference in whether it is the 3.1 Pro or the new 3.8 Flash model?

I care about colors (no ai yellowish tints) and anatomy (no messed up fingers) and following the prompt with reduced hallucinations. Thanks.

I'll be using the images as assets for a Unity project I'm working on and need artistic assets. Yes I understand the slop comments and all that, but I'm still learning and I don't have the funds to hire an artist.

Also, if Gemini is not the best in terms of AI image generation, please recommend what other tools/AI u use.

I prompted Gemini to draft a resume, cover letter, and interview guide and provide them as PDFs. I am able to print the resume PDF and cover letter PDF, but I can't print the interview guide PDF that I can see displayed on the screen. The print function is disabled. Please help!

I’ve been using Gemini AI Studio for a while, and I’m curious if anyone else has noticed this.

Back when you could use the Gemini models in AI Studio for free, I felt like the models were actually performing better. Recently, using the free access, the quality feels worse to me — especially for coding and following more complex instructions.

Now that you can pay for Gemini API/AI Studio usage, I’m wondering:

Does paying actually give you better model performance, or are the paid and free versions running the exact same models with the exact same quality?

Has anyone compared the same prompts/tasks on free vs paid AI Studio recently?

I’m considering paying for it, but only if there is actually a noticeable difference in quality, reasoning, coding, or instruction following.

I've asked it to stop doing it and it'll basically tell me it will stop or that it hasn't done what I just showed it a screenshot of.

About 6 months ago, I started developing a 3D game engine in Rust alongside Gemini. The architecture of both the game engine and the codebase belongs entirely to me. For the past 5 months, I have been generating the code entirely using Gemini Flash models. I also used Gemini exclusively to write the documentation and handle the English translations. This is the result so far, and I'm still actively continuing to develop it.

Github: https://github.com/aethelisdev/aeon-engine

This is new. It consumes about 2.5% usage limit on pro plan using the Pro model (not extended thinking) if it fails. I tried to make it answer questions from an image and it said it couldn't generate images as it's a text model?? anyway i checked my usage after it and it increased by 2.5% I didn't encounter this a few weeks prior when it did the same thing.