[jjani]

Gemini 2.5 Pro is widely considered superior to 3.7 Sonnet now by heavy users, but they don't have an SWE-bench score. Shows that looking at one such benchmark isn't very telling. Main advantage over Sonnet being that it's better at using a large amount of context, which is enormously helpful during coding tasks.

Sonnet is still an incredibly impressive model as it held the crown for 6 months, which may as well be a decade with the current pace of LLM improvement.

[unsupp0rted]

Main advantage over Sonnet is Gemini 2.5 doesn't try to make a bunch of unrelated changes like it's rewriting my project from scratch.

[itsmevictor]

I find Gemini 2.5 truly remarkable and overall better than Claude, which I was a big fan of

[enraged_camel]

Still doesn't work well in Cursor unfortunately.

[ai-christianson]

Works well in RA.Aid --in fact I'd recommend it as the default model in terms of overall cost and capability.

[plantain]

Working fine here. What problems do you see?

[michaelbarton]

Not the OP but believe they could be referring to the fact it’s not supported in edit mode yet, only agent mode.

So far for me that’s not been too much of a roadblock. Though I still find overall Gemini struggles with more obscure issues such as SQL errors in dbt

[pdntspa]

Cline/Roo Code work fine with it

[bitbuilder]

This was incredibly irritating at first, though over time I've learned to appreciate this "extra credit" work. It can be fun to see what Claude thinks I can do better, or should add in addition to whatever feature I just asked for. Especially when it comes to UI work, Claude actually has some pretty cool ideas.

If I'm using Claude through Copilot where it's "free" I'll let it do its thing and just roll back to the last commit if it gets too ambitious. If I really want it to stay on track I'll explicitly tell it in the prompt to focus only on what I've asked, and that seems to work.

And just today, I found myself leaving a comment like this: //Note to Claude: Do not refactor the below. It's ugly, but it's supposed to be that way.

Never thought I'd see the day I was leaving comments for my AI agent coworker.

[TuxSH]

> If I'm using Claude through Copilot where it's "free"

Too bad Microsoft is widely limiting this -- have you seen their pricing changes?

I also feel like they nerfed their models, or reduced context window again.

[Aeolun]

Claude is almost comically good outside of copilot. When using through copilot it’s like working with a lobotomized idiot (that complains it generated public code about half the time).

[TuxSH]

It used to be good, or at least quite decent in GH Copilot, but it all turned into poop (the completions, the models, everything) ever since they announced the pricing changes.

Considering that M$ obviously trains over GitHub data, I'm a bit pissed, honestly, even if I get GH Copilot Pro for free.

[erikw]

What language / framework are you using? I ask because in a Node / Typescript / React project I experience the opposite- Claude 3.7 usually solves my query on the first try, and seems to understand the project's context, ie the file structure, packages, coding guidelines, tests, etc, while Gemini 2.5 seems to install packages willy-nilly, duplicate existing tests, create duplicate components, etc.

[unsupp0rted]

Node / Vue

[jdgoesmarching]

Also that Gemini 2.5 still doesn’t support prompt caching, which is huge for tools like Cline.

[scrlk]

2.5 Pro supports prompt caching now: https://cloud.google.com/vertex-ai/generative-ai/docs/models...

[jdgoesmarching]

Oh, that must’ve been in the last few days. Weird that it’s only in 2.5 Pro preview but at least they’re headed in the right direction.

Now they just need a decent usage dashboard that doesn’t take a day to populate or require additional GCP monitoring services to break out the model usage.

[Workaccount2]

It's viable context, context length where is doesn't fall apart, is also much longer.

[zaptrem]

I do find it likes to subtly reformat every single line thereby nuking my diff and making its changes unusable since I can’t verify them that way, which Sonnet doesn’t do.

[armen52]

I don't understand this assertion, but maybe I'm missing something?

Google included a SWE-bench score of 63.8% in their announcement for Gemini 2.5 Pro: https://blog.google/technology/google-deepmind/gemini-model-...

[amedviediev]

I keep seeing this sentiment so often here and on X that I have to wonder if I'm somehow using a different Gemini 2.5 Pro. I've been trying to use it for a couple of weeks already and without exaggeration it has yet to solve a single programming task successfully. It is constantly wrong, constantly misunderstands my requests, ignores constraints, ignores existing coding conventions, breaks my code and then tells me to fix it myself.

[spaceman_2020]

I feel that Claude 3.7 is smarter, but does way too much and has poor prompt adherence

[redox99]

2.5 Pro is very buggy with cursor. It often stops before generating any code. It's likely a cursor problem, but I use 3.7 because of that.

[saberience]

Eh, I wouldn't say that's accurate, I think it's situational. I code all day using AI tools and Sonnet 3.7 is still the king. Maybe it's language dependent or something, but all the engineers I know are full on Claude-Code at this point.