Gemini 3.0 spotted in the wild through A/B testing

Re:Gemini 3.0 spotted in the wild through A/B testing by nl on Thursday October 16, 2025 @09:20PM (#45612464)

OpenAI Codex currently seems quite a lot better than Gemini 2.5 and marginally better than Claude.

I'm using all three back-to-back via the VS Code plugins (which I believe are equivalent to the CLI tools).

I can live with either OpenAI Codex or Claude. Gemini 2.5 is useful but it is consistently not quite as good as the other two.

I agree that for non-Agentic coding tasks Gemini 2.5 is really good though.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Gemini 3.0 spotted in the wild through A/B testing by pdimitar on Thursday October 16, 2025 @09:44PM (#45612604)

Since I have only used Gemini Pro 2.5 (free) and Claude on the web (free) and I am thinking of subbing to one service or two, are you saying that:

- Gemini Pro 2.5 is better at feeding it more code and ask it to do a task (or more than one)? - ...but that GPT Codex and Claude Code are better at iterating on a project? - ...or something else?

I am looking to gauge my options. Will be grateful for your shared experience.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Gemini 3.0 spotted in the wild through A/B testing by nl on Friday October 17, 2025 @03:13AM (#45614060)

Codex and Claude are better than Gemini in all coding tasks I've tried.

At the "smart autocomplete" level the distinction isn't large but it gets bigger the more agentic you ask for.

[ Parent | on HN ]