Skip to main content

Model family by Google

Gemini Pro

Google's Gemini family for complex reasoning and multimodal work.

Where it sits in Google's lineup

  1. Gemini ProGoogle's Gemini family for complex reasoning and multimodal work.This model
  2. Gemini FlashGoogle's Gemini family balancing capability, speed, and cost.Gemini 3.8 Flash
  3. GemmaGoogle's open-weight Gemma models, built from the technology behind Gemini.Gemma 4 31B
Made by
Google
Releases
2 tracked
Current release
Gemini 4 Argon

Strengths and weaknesses

Compare with other models Up to 3 beside Gemini 4 Argon

  • Gemini 4 Argon

Suggested comparisons

Gemini 4 Argon is the newest Gemini Pro release. Add its earlier releases to see how the line moved.

Gemini 4 ArgonGoogleThis page, always on the chart

Among the 40 current releases on this chart, Gemini 4 Argon ranks first of 38 on Tool use, first of 24 on Science and second of 25 on Answers in full. Computer use is Google's own figure on OSWorld 2.0, marked on the chart. It ranks lowest on Long context, 28th of 38. Multimodal: not yet published by Google or any independent evaluator, checked Nov 2, 2026.

Each axis is one public benchmark at one setting, on its own fixed 0 to 100 scale, so adding a model never moves another. A dotted bridge crosses a missing result, which is never a zero. A hollow mark is a result from another source: the maker's own figure or another lab's run, where the benchmark's usual source has not tested the model yet. The readout names it.

On the chart

  • Gemini 4 ArgonThis pageResults on 11 of 12 axes$2 / $10Rises to $4 / $20 on Dec 1, 2026.82 tokens/sFirst token in 47 s

Prices and speeds read between Oct 27, 2026 and Oct 28, 2026.

Gemini 4 Argon on each axis11 of 12 with a result

Beside the benchmarks

Cost, speed, capacity, quality and accuracy for Gemini 4 Argon, with where each figure sits among the 40 models GILD tracks. These measures stand beside the chart and never feed it.

Cost

$1.62per task

Cost per task. One Intelligence Index task at list price, every token counted. Run at high effort.

Cached input
$0.10 per 1M tokens

Speed

81tokens a second

Output speed. How fast it writes once the answer starts. Run at high effort.

First token
48 s
Whole answer
54 s

Capacity

1.05Mtokens

Context window. The most one request can hold, as the maker states it.

Max output
66K
Reads
Text, Images

Quality

52.6of 100

Intelligence Index. One composite score across independent evaluations. Run at high effort.

GDPval knowledge work
1,631 Elo
Terminal-Bench 4.0
57.1%
Epoch Capabilities Index
166

Hallucination

4.3%wrong when it should say “I don’t know”

Hallucination rate. Of the questions it can't get right, how often it answers anyway. Lower is better. Run at high effort.

Knowledge accuracy
48.3%

Where you can get it

10of 19 routes

Routes offering it. Of the clouds, gateways and coding products GILD tracks, those offering it today.

Open weights
No
Licence
Gemini API Additional Terms of Service
Every route and price

Figures from Artificial Analysis, Google, Epoch AI and GILD's route matrix, read Oct 26 to Nov 1, 2026. Each measure's definition and source open under .

Every value with its benchmark, run and source

Gemini 4 Argon's result on each axis, with the benchmark, the setting and run, who reported it, the source and the date
AxisBenchmark and settingGemini 4 ArgonRunSourceDate
Agentic codingTerminal-Bench 4.0Pass@1 averaged over 3 runs, mini-swe-agent harness57.6%Gemini 4 ArgonEffort: not published. Harness: mini-swe-agent.Vals.aiOct 24, 2026
CodeSciCodeSubproblem accuracy, pass@1, highest effort run61.8%Gemini 4 Argon (High)Effort: high. Harness: none.Artificial AnalysisOct 28, 2026
MathFrontierMath Tiers 1-3Accuracy, pass@1, highest effort run86%Effort: high. Harness: none.Epoch AIOct 13, 2026
ScienceGPQA DiamondAccuracy, pass@1, highest effort run96.4%Effort: high. Harness: none.Epoch AIOct 13, 2026
Hard reasoningHumanity's Last ExamAccuracy, text-only questions, no tools57.1%Gemini 4 Argon (High)Effort: high. Harness: none.Artificial AnalysisOct 28, 2026
Tool useAutomationBench-AAScore, Artificial Analysis run77.5%Gemini 4 Argon (High)Effort: high. Harness: Artificial Analysis AutomationBench harness.Artificial AnalysisOct 28, 2026
Computer useOSWorld 2.0Partial score, offline set, v2026.08.08 release. Google's own run at its highest thinking setting in its Gemini computer-use harness, best of 3 runs. No outside lab has run it.Stands in for OSWorld 2.1, partial score, full 108-task set, v2.1 release, which has no run of Gemini 4 Argon yet.69.2%Gemini 4 ArgonEffort: high. Harness: Gemini CUA harness (OSWorld 2.0 repo), batch tool calls.GoogleReported by GoogleSep 30, 2026
Long contextAA-LCR v1.1Accuracy, Artificial Analysis run79.7%Gemini 4 Argon (High)Effort: high. Harness: none.Artificial AnalysisOct 28, 2026
MultimodalMMMU-ProOverall accuracy, no toolsNot yet published by Google or any independent evaluator, checked Nov 2, 2026
FactualityAA-Omniscience AccuracyAccuracy, Artificial Analysis run48.3%Hallucination rate 4.3% in the same run (lower is better)Gemini 4 Argon (High)Effort: high. Harness: none.Artificial AnalysisOct 28, 2026
Answers in fullSpeechMap% Complete over 2,120 contested requests, reasoning-on entry. SpeechMap tested it through OpenRouter at medium reasoning and counted 10.2% of requests denied and 2.4% evaded.87%0.4% of requests failed at the provider and count against itEffort: medium. Harness: none.SpeechMap.AIOct 27, 2026
Instruction followingMultiChallengeAccuracy, Scale AI run. On Oct 28, 2026, Scale AI ranked it 2nd.78.7%Plus or minus 5.3 points (95% interval)Gemini 4 ArgonEffort: not published. Harness: none.Scale AI SEALOct 28, 2026

Price and speed

  • Gemini 4 Argon lists at $2 per million input tokens and $10 per million output tokens. Rises to $4 / $20 on Dec 1, 2026. Google pricing, Oct 27, 2026.
  • Gemini 4 Argon, at high effort, writes 82 output tokens per second on Google's API, and its first token arrives 47 s after the request. Artificial Analysis, Oct 28, 2026.
  • Fastest on the chart is the shortest time to a 500-token answer: time to first token plus 500 tokens at the median output speed.

Every model with a result, axis by axis

57 models. A maker's own figure and another lab's run are marked with their benchmark; a missing result reads "Not yet published", never zero.

The result of every model GILD has benchmark results for, on each of the 12 axes. A vendor-reported value is marked. A model's run notes open under its row from its name, each with the axes it covers.
ModelAgentic codingCodeMathScienceHard reasoningTool useComputer useLong contextMultimodalFactualityAnswers in fullInstructions
Gemini 4 Argon57.6%61.8%86%96.4%57.1%77.5%69.2%Reported by GoogleOSWorld 2.079.7%Not yet published48.3%87%78.7%
Gemini 3.8 Flash19.7%56.6%68.4%95.4%47.8%59.9%59%Reported by GoogleOSWorld 2.081.3%85.6%50.5%86.1%Not yet published
Gemma 4 31BNot yet published45.5%Not yet published85.7%Run by Artificial AnalysisGPQA Diamond23.6%4.9%Not yet published69.7%73.4%10.4%Run by Epoch AISimpleQA Verified82.3%75.6%Run by Artificial AnalysisIFBench
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview2.5%58.7%59.6%94.4%47%35.4%Not yet published82%82.4%54.9%59.9%71.4%
Gemini 3.6 Flash7.1%Run by Artificial AnalysisTerminal-Bench 4.053.4%58.9%94.1%40.8%53%83%Reported by GoogleOSWorld-Verified80%83.2%66.2%Run by Epoch AISimpleQA Verified87.2%Not yet published
Claude Haiku 5.536.4%55%75.1%89.6%44.4%35.4%72.4%Reported by AnthropicOSWorld 2.182.7%Not yet published34.7%78.8%67.7%
Claude Sonnet 5.564.1%61%88.8%95.6%55%71.8%80.1%Reported by Anthropic82.7%Not yet published51.5%81.6%Not yet published
Claude Opus 5.565.2%66.9%91.2%90.6%61.4%69.5%81.8%Reported by Anthropic84.7%87.7%65.5%82.8%Not yet published
Claude Fable 5.158.1%63.1%90.2%93.4%Run by Vals.ai59.1%59.4%80.7%Reported by Anthropic85.3%86.3%Run by Moonshot AI68.4%72.4%Not yet published
Claude Opus 553.5%56.4%85.6%93.9%54.9%56.6%77.7%79.3%84.7%60.9%73.7%Not yet published
Claude Sonnet 510.6%54.3%65.6%80.3%41.3%36.5%57%Reported by Anthropic82%77.3%40.1%Not yet publishedNot yet published
Claude Fable 541.4%61%87%85.9%55.5%54.1%Not yet published82.3%Not yet published65.4%64.8%63.5%Run by Artificial AnalysisIFBench
Claude Opus 4.823.2%54.4%80%91%48.7%45.6%54.8%Run by OSWorld teamOSWorld 2.077.7%Not yet published48.8%67.4%62.2%Run by Artificial AnalysisIFBench
Claude Opus 4.7Not yet published54.5%70.2%86.4%42.3%Not yet published48.9%Run by OSWorld teamOSWorld 2.078.7%78.8%48.9%70.2%58.6%Run by Artificial AnalysisIFBench
Claude Sonnet 4.63%Run by Artificial AnalysisTerminal-Bench 4.050.1%71.1%Run by Epoch AIOTIS Mock AIME 2024-202578.8%33.6%20.1%41.5%Run by OSWorld teamOSWorld 2.080%73.3%40.9%35.8%56.6%Run by Artificial AnalysisIFBench
Claude Opus 4.6Not yet publishedNot yet published66%88.4%39.9%Not yet publishedNot yet published78%75.4%47%59.9%37.2%
Claude Opus 4.5Not yet publishedNot yet published34.4%86%30.1%Not yet publishedNot yet published77.3%74%46.6%57.5%59%
Claude Haiku 4.5Not yet published42.2%66.7%Run by Epoch AIOTIS Mock AIME 2024-202571.2%10.4%3.2%Not yet published74.3%58.6%18%24.7%50.5%
Claude Sonnet 4.5Not yet published45.7%23.9%82.3%17.8%14.1%Not yet published72.3%68.7%32.9%31.4%55.3%
GPT-6.1 Terra49.5%55.1%90.9%94.3%46.2%60.2%74.2%Reported by OpenAIOSWorld 2.182.7%84.7%47.6%Not yet published74.2%
GPT-6.1 Sol55.1%54.2%93.7%95.4%52.9%64.9%78%Reported by OpenAIOSWorld 2.183%86%61.8%69.5%82%
GPT-6 Luna13.6%54.6%78.9%90.5%38.5%53.2%48.9%Run by AnthropicOSWorld 2.183.3%79.7%39.6%63.4%Not yet published
GPT-6 Astra59.6%56.5%93.7%95.8%54.7%68.5%75.8%Run by Meta80.7%86.9%61.6%68.2%Not yet published
GPT-5.6 Sol37.9%57.1%89.1%93.5%49.5%60.1%62.7%Run by OSWorld teamOSWorld 2.084%83.4%69.7%Run by Epoch AISimpleQA VerifiedNot yet published72.7%Run by Artificial AnalysisIFBench
GPT-5.6 Terra22.7%55%86%93.3%42.9%59.6%Not yet published83%80.7%42.3%Not yet published71.2%Run by Artificial AnalysisIFBench
GPT-5.6 Luna11.6%53.6%82.1%91.6%39.5%50.2%Not yet published83.7%78.6%41%Run by Epoch AISimpleQA VerifiedNot yet publishedNot yet published
GPT-5.514.6%Run by Artificial AnalysisTerminal-Bench 4.055.8%85.3%93.5%Run by Artificial Analysis45.8%47.3%49.5%Run by OSWorld teamOSWorld 2.084.3%79.9%63%Run by Epoch AISimpleQA VerifiedNot yet published75.9%Run by Artificial AnalysisIFBench
GPT-5.4Not yet publishedNot yet published78.6%93.3%43.7%Not yet publishedNot yet published82%78.4%Not yet publishedNot yet published73.9%Run by Artificial AnalysisIFBench
gpt-oss-120b14.2%Run by Terminal-Bench (via Epoch AI)Terminal-Bench 2.034%88.9%Run by Epoch AIOTIS Mock AIME 2024-202575.8%19.6%0.2%Not yet published52%Not yet published16.8%Reported by OpenAISimpleQA36.3%45.3%
GPT-6 Sol44.4%57.6%89.8%94.3%47.9%61.6%64.4%Reported by OpenAIOSWorld 2.083.7%82.9%54.5%64%Not yet published
GPT-5.3-CodexNot yet publishedNot yet publishedNot yet published91.5%Run by Artificial Analysis42.5%Not yet publishedNot yet published83.3%78.5%Not yet publishedNot yet published75.4%Run by Artificial AnalysisIFBench
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash31.8%55.9%71.2%93.2%43.3%66.6%69.3%Run by Moonshot AIOSWorld 2.182.7%80.6%39.6%Not yet published74.9%
DeepSeek V4 Pro14.1%51%64.6%91.7%41%56.7%Not yet published80.3%Not yet published45.2%72%Not yet published
Kimi K3.1 Pro63.6%60.8%Not yet published94.2%Reported by Moonshot AI52.5%73.3%79.6%Reported by Moonshot AIOSWorld 2.186.3%83.9%48.9%Not yet publishedNot yet published
Kimi K317.2%59.5%72.2%93.1%46.9%58.3%Not yet published88.7%80.5%50.6%Run by Epoch AISimpleQA Verified65.9%Not yet published
Kimi K2.7 Code1%Run by Artificial AnalysisTerminal-Bench 4.047.8%54%87.9%35%24.5%Not yet published79.3%Not yet published36.5%Run by Epoch AISimpleQA VerifiedNot yet published63.1%Run by Artificial AnalysisIFBench
Mistral Large 424.7%Run by Artificial AnalysisTerminal-Bench 4.0Not yet publishedNot yet publishedNot yet publishedNot yet published57.8%Not yet publishedNot yet publishedNot yet published26%Not yet publishedNot yet published
Mistral Medium 3.50%Run by Artificial AnalysisTerminal-Bench 4.040.2%Not yet published74.8%Run by Artificial AnalysisGPQA Diamond13.8%6.3%Not yet published69.3%64.9%23%70.5%68.8%Run by Artificial AnalysisIFBench
Grok 4.728.8%57.4%53%92.7%43.1%65.6%Not yet published76.7%Not yet published42.7%64.1%Not yet published
Grok 4.617.2%56.5%66%93.2%42.9%66.7%Not yet published80.3%Not yet published48.9%Run by Epoch AISimpleQA Verified83.6%Not yet published
Grok 4.58.6%55%57.2%93.4%42.7%57.9%Not yet published79.3%80.4%48.3%Run by Epoch AISimpleQA Verified93.1%Not yet published
MiniMax M3.1 Flash25.3%53.4%Not yet publishedNot yet published48%72.5%61.7%Reported by MiniMaxOSWorld 2.079.7%79.1%45.1%Not yet publishedNot yet published
Mercury 33%Not yet publishedNot yet publishedNot yet publishedNot yet publishedNot yet publishedNot yet publishedNot yet publishedNot yet publishedNot yet publishedNot yet publishedNot yet published
GLM-5.3-Flash37.4%51.6%55.8%90.2%39.9%60.4%59.1%Reported by Z.aiOSWorld 2.080%86%Run by Vals.aiMMMU-Pro28.2%65.4%Not yet published
GLM-5.338.9%59%68.8%90.9%42.3%62.2%Not yet published79.7%Not yet published32.3%71.5%Not yet published
GLM-5.21%Run by Artificial AnalysisTerminal-Bench 4.051.2%59.2%Not yet published41.1%28.4%Not yet published78.3%Not yet published34.2%Run by Epoch AISimpleQA VerifiedNot yet published73.3%Run by Artificial AnalysisIFBench
Muse Spark Open6.6%58.4%69.8%88.6%43.9%49.7%80.4%Reported by MetaOSWorld-Verified78.3%80.9%42%Not yet published74.2%
Muse Wonder49.5%60.3%82.1%Not yet published50.1%68.1%72.6%Reported by Meta80.7%Not yet published38%42.7%Not yet published
Muse Spark 1.310.6%58.8%74%93.5%Run by Artificial AnalysisGPQA Diamond48.7%57.9%69.6%83%82%38%25.8%Not yet published
Llama 4 ScoutNot yet published21.3%7.8%Run by Epoch AIOTIS Mock AIME 2024-202551.8%3.8%0.2%Not yet published27.7%52.9%Not yet published70.1%39.5%Run by Artificial AnalysisIFBench
Llama 4 MaverickNot yet published31.7%20.6%Run by Epoch AIOTIS Mock AIME 2024-202567%4.9%0.2%Not yet published50%62.1%Not yet published58.3%43%Run by Artificial AnalysisIFBench
Qwen3.8 27B5.6%Run by Artificial AnalysisTerminal-Bench 4.046.6%Not yet published90.5%Run by Artificial AnalysisGPQA Diamond33.9%48.2%84.3%Reported by AlibabaOSWorld-Verified82%76.3%17.3%Not yet published79.5%Reported by AlibabaIFBench
Qwen3.8 Max38.9%52.1%65.6%92.3%43.1%56.2%Not yet published80.3%82.8%29.5%65.3%Not yet published
MiMo-V2.6-Pro31.3%60.9%Not yet publishedNot yet published49.4%58.6%82%Reported by XiaomiOSWorld-Verified86.3%Not yet published34.8%66.5%Not yet published
MiMo-V2.6-Flash24.2%51.3%Not yet publishedNot yet published35.1%64.1%80.8%Reported by XiaomiOSWorld-Verified74.3%73.1%27.2%66.9%Not yet published
Ling 3.1 Flash32.8%Run by Artificial AnalysisTerminal-Bench 4.056.8%Not yet publishedNot yet published43.5%67.5%Not yet published82.3%Not yet published26.5%Not yet publishedNot yet published
Step 5 Preview31.8%58.9%Not yet published93.5%Reported by StepFunGPQA Diamond46.5%51%Not yet published88.3%76.4%36.4%59.7%Not yet published

Agentic codingTerminal-Bench 4.0

  1. Claude Opus 5.565.2%
  2. Claude Sonnet 5.564.1%
  3. Kimi K3.1 Pro63.6%
  4. GPT-6 Astra59.6%
  5. Claude Fable 5.158.1%
  6. Gemini 4 Argon57.6%
  7. GPT-6.1 Sol55.1%
  8. Claude Opus 553.5%
  9. GPT-6.1 Terra49.5%
  10. Muse Wonder49.5%
  11. GPT-6 Sol44.4%
  12. Claude Fable 541.4%
  13. GLM-5.338.9%
  14. Qwen3.8 Max38.9%
  15. GPT-5.6 Sol37.9%
  16. GLM-5.3-Flash37.4%
  17. Claude Haiku 5.536.4%
  18. DeepSeek V4.1 Flash31.8%
  19. Step 5 Preview31.8%
  20. MiMo-V2.6-Pro31.3%
  21. Grok 4.728.8%
  22. MiniMax M3.1 Flash25.3%
  23. MiMo-V2.6-Flash24.2%
  24. Claude Opus 4.823.2%
  25. GPT-5.6 Terra22.7%
  26. Gemini 3.8 Flash19.7%
  27. Kimi K317.2%
  28. Grok 4.617.2%
  29. DeepSeek V4 Pro14.1%
  30. GPT-6 Luna13.6%
  31. GPT-5.6 Luna11.6%
  32. Claude Sonnet 510.6%
  33. Muse Spark 1.310.6%
  34. Grok 4.58.6%
  35. Muse Spark Open6.6%
  36. Mercury 33%
  37. Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview2.5%
  38. Ling 3.1 Flash32.8%Artificial Analysis's run, Terminal-Bench 4.0
  39. Mistral Large 424.7%Artificial Analysis's run, Terminal-Bench 4.0
  40. GPT-5.514.6%Artificial Analysis's run, Terminal-Bench 4.0
  41. gpt-oss-120b14.2%Terminal-Bench's run, Terminal-Bench 2.0
  42. Gemini 3.6 Flash7.1%Artificial Analysis's run, Terminal-Bench 4.0
  43. Qwen3.8 27B5.6%Artificial Analysis's run, Terminal-Bench 4.0
  44. Claude Sonnet 4.63%Artificial Analysis's run, Terminal-Bench 4.0
  45. Kimi K2.7 Code1%Artificial Analysis's run, Terminal-Bench 4.0
  46. GLM-5.21%Artificial Analysis's run, Terminal-Bench 4.0
  47. Mistral Medium 3.50%Artificial Analysis's run, Terminal-Bench 4.0

The other models in the grid have no result on Terminal-Bench 4.0 yet.

CodeSciCode

  1. Claude Opus 5.566.9%
  2. Claude Fable 5.163.1%
  3. Gemini 4 Argon61.8%
  4. Claude Sonnet 5.561%
  5. Claude Fable 561%
  6. MiMo-V2.6-Pro60.9%
  7. Kimi K3.1 Pro60.8%
  8. Muse Wonder60.3%
  9. Kimi K359.5%
  10. GLM-5.359%
  11. Step 5 Preview58.9%
  12. Muse Spark 1.358.8%
  13. Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview58.7%
  14. Muse Spark Open58.4%
  15. GPT-6 Sol57.6%
  16. Grok 4.757.4%
  17. GPT-5.6 Sol57.1%
  18. Ling 3.1 Flash56.8%
  19. Gemini 3.8 Flash56.6%
  20. GPT-6 Astra56.5%
  21. Grok 4.656.5%
  22. Claude Opus 556.4%
  23. DeepSeek V4.1 Flash55.9%
  24. GPT-5.555.8%
  25. GPT-6.1 Terra55.1%
  26. Claude Haiku 5.555%
  27. GPT-5.6 Terra55%
  28. Grok 4.555%
  29. GPT-6 Luna54.6%
  30. Claude Opus 4.754.5%
  31. Claude Opus 4.854.4%
  32. Claude Sonnet 554.3%
  33. GPT-6.1 Sol54.2%
  34. GPT-5.6 Luna53.6%
  35. Gemini 3.6 Flash53.4%
  36. MiniMax M3.1 Flash53.4%
  37. Qwen3.8 Max52.1%
  38. GLM-5.3-Flash51.6%
  39. MiMo-V2.6-Flash51.3%
  40. GLM-5.251.2%
  41. DeepSeek V4 Pro51%
  42. Claude Sonnet 4.650.1%
  43. Kimi K2.7 Code47.8%
  44. Qwen3.8 27B46.6%
  45. Claude Sonnet 4.545.7%
  46. Gemma 4 31B45.5%
  47. Claude Haiku 4.542.2%
  48. Mistral Medium 3.540.2%
  49. gpt-oss-120b34%
  50. Llama 4 Maverick31.7%
  51. Llama 4 Scout21.3%

The other models in the grid have no result on SciCode yet.

MathFrontierMath Tiers 1-3

  1. GPT-6.1 Sol93.7%
  2. GPT-6 Astra93.7%
  3. Claude Opus 5.591.2%
  4. GPT-6.1 Terra90.9%
  5. Claude Fable 5.190.2%
  6. GPT-6 Sol89.8%
  7. GPT-5.6 Sol89.1%
  8. Claude Sonnet 5.588.8%
  9. Claude Fable 587%
  10. Gemini 4 Argon86%
  11. GPT-5.6 Terra86%
  12. Claude Opus 585.6%
  13. GPT-5.585.3%
  14. GPT-5.6 Luna82.1%
  15. Muse Wonder82.1%
  16. Claude Opus 4.880%
  17. GPT-6 Luna78.9%
  18. GPT-5.478.6%
  19. Claude Haiku 5.575.1%
  20. Muse Spark 1.374%
  21. Kimi K372.2%
  22. DeepSeek V4.1 Flash71.2%
  23. Claude Opus 4.770.2%
  24. Muse Spark Open69.8%
  25. GLM-5.368.8%
  26. Gemini 3.8 Flash68.4%
  27. Claude Opus 4.666%
  28. Grok 4.666%
  29. Claude Sonnet 565.6%
  30. Qwen3.8 Max65.6%
  31. DeepSeek V4 Pro64.6%
  32. Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview59.6%
  33. GLM-5.259.2%
  34. Gemini 3.6 Flash58.9%
  35. Grok 4.557.2%
  36. GLM-5.3-Flash55.8%
  37. Kimi K2.7 Code54%
  38. Grok 4.753%
  39. Claude Opus 4.534.4%
  40. Claude Sonnet 4.523.9%
  41. gpt-oss-120b88.9%Epoch AI's run, OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025
  42. Claude Sonnet 4.671.1%Epoch AI's run, OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025
  43. Claude Haiku 4.566.7%Epoch AI's run, OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025
  44. Llama 4 Maverick20.6%Epoch AI's run, OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025
  45. Llama 4 Scout7.8%Epoch AI's run, OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025

The other models in the grid have no result on FrontierMath Tiers 1-3 yet.

ScienceGPQA Diamond

  1. Gemini 4 Argon96.4%
  2. GPT-6 Astra95.8%
  3. Claude Sonnet 5.595.6%
  4. Gemini 3.8 Flash95.4%
  5. GPT-6.1 Sol95.4%
  6. Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview94.4%
  7. GPT-6.1 Terra94.3%
  8. GPT-6 Sol94.3%
  9. Gemini 3.6 Flash94.1%
  10. Claude Opus 593.9%
  11. GPT-5.6 Sol93.5%
  12. Grok 4.593.4%
  13. GPT-5.6 Terra93.3%
  14. GPT-5.493.3%
  15. DeepSeek V4.1 Flash93.2%
  16. Grok 4.693.2%
  17. Kimi K393.1%
  18. Grok 4.792.7%
  19. Qwen3.8 Max92.3%
  20. DeepSeek V4 Pro91.7%
  21. GPT-5.6 Luna91.6%
  22. Claude Opus 4.891%
  23. GLM-5.390.9%
  24. Claude Opus 5.590.6%
  25. GPT-6 Luna90.5%
  26. GLM-5.3-Flash90.2%
  27. Claude Haiku 5.589.6%
  28. Muse Spark Open88.6%
  29. Claude Opus 4.688.4%
  30. Kimi K2.7 Code87.9%
  31. Claude Opus 4.786.4%
  32. Claude Opus 4.586%
  33. Claude Fable 585.9%
  34. Claude Sonnet 4.582.3%
  35. Claude Sonnet 580.3%
  36. Claude Sonnet 4.678.8%
  37. gpt-oss-120b75.8%
  38. Claude Haiku 4.571.2%
  39. Llama 4 Maverick67%
  40. Llama 4 Scout51.8%
  41. Kimi K3.1 Pro94.2%Moonshot AI's own figure
  42. GPT-5.593.5%Artificial Analysis's run
  43. Muse Spark 1.393.5%Artificial Analysis's run, GPQA Diamond
  44. Step 5 Preview93.5%StepFun's own figure, GPQA Diamond
  45. Claude Fable 5.193.4%Vals.ai's run
  46. GPT-5.3-Codex91.5%Artificial Analysis's run
  47. Qwen3.8 27B90.5%Artificial Analysis's run, GPQA Diamond
  48. Gemma 4 31B85.7%Artificial Analysis's run, GPQA Diamond
  49. Mistral Medium 3.574.8%Artificial Analysis's run, GPQA Diamond

The other models in the grid have no result on GPQA Diamond yet.

Hard reasoningHumanity's Last Exam

  1. Claude Opus 5.561.4%
  2. Claude Fable 5.159.1%
  3. Gemini 4 Argon57.1%
  4. Claude Fable 555.5%
  5. Claude Sonnet 5.555%
  6. Claude Opus 554.9%
  7. GPT-6 Astra54.7%
  8. GPT-6.1 Sol52.9%
  9. Kimi K3.1 Pro52.5%
  10. Muse Wonder50.1%
  11. GPT-5.6 Sol49.5%
  12. MiMo-V2.6-Pro49.4%
  13. Claude Opus 4.848.7%
  14. Muse Spark 1.348.7%
  15. MiniMax M3.1 Flash48%
  16. GPT-6 Sol47.9%
  17. Gemini 3.8 Flash47.8%
  18. Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview47%
  19. Kimi K346.9%
  20. Step 5 Preview46.5%
  21. GPT-6.1 Terra46.2%
  22. GPT-5.545.8%
  23. Claude Haiku 5.544.4%
  24. Muse Spark Open43.9%
  25. GPT-5.443.7%
  26. Ling 3.1 Flash43.5%
  27. DeepSeek V4.1 Flash43.3%
  28. Grok 4.743.1%
  29. Qwen3.8 Max43.1%
  30. GPT-5.6 Terra42.9%
  31. Grok 4.642.9%
  32. Grok 4.542.7%
  33. GPT-5.3-Codex42.5%
  34. Claude Opus 4.742.3%
  35. GLM-5.342.3%
  36. Claude Sonnet 541.3%
  37. GLM-5.241.1%
  38. DeepSeek V4 Pro41%
  39. Gemini 3.6 Flash40.8%
  40. Claude Opus 4.639.9%
  41. GLM-5.3-Flash39.9%
  42. GPT-5.6 Luna39.5%
  43. GPT-6 Luna38.5%
  44. MiMo-V2.6-Flash35.1%
  45. Kimi K2.7 Code35%
  46. Qwen3.8 27B33.9%
  47. Claude Sonnet 4.633.6%
  48. Claude Opus 4.530.1%
  49. Gemma 4 31B23.6%
  50. gpt-oss-120b19.6%
  51. Claude Sonnet 4.517.8%
  52. Mistral Medium 3.513.8%
  53. Claude Haiku 4.510.4%
  54. Llama 4 Maverick4.9%
  55. Llama 4 Scout3.8%

The other models in the grid have no result on Humanity's Last Exam yet.

Tool useAutomationBench-AA

  1. Gemini 4 Argon77.5%
  2. Kimi K3.1 Pro73.3%
  3. MiniMax M3.1 Flash72.5%
  4. Claude Sonnet 5.571.8%
  5. Claude Opus 5.569.5%
  6. GPT-6 Astra68.5%
  7. Muse Wonder68.1%
  8. Ling 3.1 Flash67.5%
  9. Grok 4.666.7%
  10. DeepSeek V4.1 Flash66.6%
  11. Grok 4.765.6%
  12. GPT-6.1 Sol64.9%
  13. MiMo-V2.6-Flash64.1%
  14. GLM-5.362.2%
  15. GPT-6 Sol61.6%
  16. GLM-5.3-Flash60.4%
  17. GPT-6.1 Terra60.2%
  18. GPT-5.6 Sol60.1%
  19. Gemini 3.8 Flash59.9%
  20. GPT-5.6 Terra59.6%
  21. Claude Fable 5.159.4%
  22. MiMo-V2.6-Pro58.6%
  23. Kimi K358.3%
  24. Grok 4.557.9%
  25. Muse Spark 1.357.9%
  26. Mistral Large 457.8%
  27. DeepSeek V4 Pro56.7%
  28. Claude Opus 556.6%
  29. Qwen3.8 Max56.2%
  30. Claude Fable 554.1%
  31. GPT-6 Luna53.2%
  32. Gemini 3.6 Flash53%
  33. Step 5 Preview51%
  34. GPT-5.6 Luna50.2%
  35. Muse Spark Open49.7%
  36. Qwen3.8 27B48.2%
  37. GPT-5.547.3%
  38. Claude Opus 4.845.6%
  39. Claude Sonnet 536.5%
  40. Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview35.4%
  41. Claude Haiku 5.535.4%
  42. GLM-5.228.4%
  43. Kimi K2.7 Code24.5%
  44. Claude Sonnet 4.620.1%
  45. Claude Sonnet 4.514.1%
  46. Mistral Medium 3.56.3%
  47. Gemma 4 31B4.9%
  48. Claude Haiku 4.53.2%
  49. gpt-oss-120b0.2%
  50. Llama 4 Scout0.2%
  51. Llama 4 Maverick0.2%

The other models in the grid have no result on AutomationBench-AA yet.

Computer useOSWorld 2.1

  1. Claude Opus 577.7%
  2. Muse Spark 1.369.6%
  3. Qwen3.8 27B84.3%Alibaba's own figure, OSWorld-Verified
  4. Gemini 3.6 Flash83%Google's own figure, OSWorld-Verified
  5. MiMo-V2.6-Pro82%Xiaomi's own figure, OSWorld-Verified
  6. Claude Opus 5.581.8%Anthropic's own figure
  7. MiMo-V2.6-Flash80.8%Xiaomi's own figure, OSWorld-Verified
  8. Claude Fable 5.180.7%Anthropic's own figure
  9. Muse Spark Open80.4%Meta's own figure, OSWorld-Verified
  10. Claude Sonnet 5.580.1%Anthropic's own figure
  11. Kimi K3.1 Pro79.6%Moonshot AI's own figure, OSWorld 2.1
  12. GPT-6.1 Sol78%OpenAI's own figure, OSWorld 2.1
  13. GPT-6 Astra75.8%Meta's run
  14. GPT-6.1 Terra74.2%OpenAI's own figure, OSWorld 2.1
  15. Muse Wonder72.6%Meta's own figure
  16. Claude Haiku 5.572.4%Anthropic's own figure, OSWorld 2.1
  17. DeepSeek V4.1 Flash69.3%Moonshot AI's run, OSWorld 2.1
  18. Gemini 4 Argon69.2%Google's own figure, OSWorld 2.0
  19. GPT-6 Sol64.4%OpenAI's own figure, OSWorld 2.0
  20. GPT-5.6 Sol62.7%OSWorld team's run, OSWorld 2.0
  21. MiniMax M3.1 Flash61.7%MiniMax's own figure, OSWorld 2.0
  22. GLM-5.3-Flash59.1%Z.ai's own figure, OSWorld 2.0
  23. Gemini 3.8 Flash59%Google's own figure, OSWorld 2.0
  24. Claude Sonnet 557%Anthropic's own figure
  25. Claude Opus 4.854.8%OSWorld team's run, OSWorld 2.0
  26. GPT-5.549.5%OSWorld team's run, OSWorld 2.0
  27. Claude Opus 4.748.9%OSWorld team's run, OSWorld 2.0
  28. GPT-6 Luna48.9%Anthropic's run, OSWorld 2.1
  29. Claude Sonnet 4.641.5%OSWorld team's run, OSWorld 2.0

The other models in the grid have no result on OSWorld 2.1 yet.

Long contextAA-LCR v1.1

  1. Kimi K388.7%
  2. Step 5 Preview88.3%
  3. Kimi K3.1 Pro86.3%
  4. MiMo-V2.6-Pro86.3%
  5. Claude Fable 5.185.3%
  6. Claude Opus 5.584.7%
  7. GPT-5.584.3%
  8. GPT-5.6 Sol84%
  9. GPT-5.6 Luna83.7%
  10. GPT-6 Sol83.7%
  11. GPT-6 Luna83.3%
  12. GPT-5.3-Codex83.3%
  13. GPT-6.1 Sol83%
  14. GPT-5.6 Terra83%
  15. Muse Spark 1.383%
  16. Claude Haiku 5.582.7%
  17. Claude Sonnet 5.582.7%
  18. GPT-6.1 Terra82.7%
  19. DeepSeek V4.1 Flash82.7%
  20. Claude Fable 582.3%
  21. Ling 3.1 Flash82.3%
  22. Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview82%
  23. Claude Sonnet 582%
  24. GPT-5.482%
  25. Qwen3.8 27B82%
  26. Gemini 3.8 Flash81.3%
  27. GPT-6 Astra80.7%
  28. Muse Wonder80.7%
  29. DeepSeek V4 Pro80.3%
  30. Grok 4.680.3%
  31. Qwen3.8 Max80.3%
  32. Gemini 3.6 Flash80%
  33. Claude Sonnet 4.680%
  34. GLM-5.3-Flash80%
  35. Gemini 4 Argon79.7%
  36. MiniMax M3.1 Flash79.7%
  37. GLM-5.379.7%
  38. Claude Opus 579.3%
  39. Kimi K2.7 Code79.3%
  40. Grok 4.579.3%
  41. Claude Opus 4.778.7%
  42. GLM-5.278.3%
  43. Muse Spark Open78.3%
  44. Claude Opus 4.678%
  45. Claude Opus 4.877.7%
  46. Claude Opus 4.577.3%
  47. Grok 4.776.7%
  48. Claude Haiku 4.574.3%
  49. MiMo-V2.6-Flash74.3%
  50. Claude Sonnet 4.572.3%
  51. Gemma 4 31B69.7%
  52. Mistral Medium 3.569.3%
  53. gpt-oss-120b52%
  54. Llama 4 Maverick50%
  55. Llama 4 Scout27.7%

The other models in the grid have no result on AA-LCR v1.1 yet.

MultimodalMMMU-Pro

  1. Claude Opus 5.587.7%
  2. GPT-6 Astra86.9%
  3. GPT-6.1 Sol86%
  4. Gemini 3.8 Flash85.6%
  5. Claude Opus 584.7%
  6. GPT-6.1 Terra84.7%
  7. Kimi K3.1 Pro83.9%
  8. GPT-5.6 Sol83.4%
  9. Gemini 3.6 Flash83.2%
  10. GPT-6 Sol82.9%
  11. Qwen3.8 Max82.8%
  12. Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview82.4%
  13. Muse Spark 1.382%
  14. Muse Spark Open80.9%
  15. GPT-5.6 Terra80.7%
  16. DeepSeek V4.1 Flash80.6%
  17. Kimi K380.5%
  18. Grok 4.580.4%
  19. GPT-5.579.9%
  20. GPT-6 Luna79.7%
  21. MiniMax M3.1 Flash79.1%
  22. Claude Opus 4.778.8%
  23. GPT-5.6 Luna78.6%
  24. GPT-5.3-Codex78.5%
  25. GPT-5.478.4%
  26. Claude Sonnet 577.3%
  27. Step 5 Preview76.4%
  28. Qwen3.8 27B76.3%
  29. Claude Opus 4.675.4%
  30. Claude Opus 4.574%
  31. Gemma 4 31B73.4%
  32. Claude Sonnet 4.673.3%
  33. MiMo-V2.6-Flash73.1%
  34. Claude Sonnet 4.568.7%
  35. Mistral Medium 3.564.9%
  36. Llama 4 Maverick62.1%
  37. Claude Haiku 4.558.6%
  38. Llama 4 Scout52.9%
  39. Claude Fable 5.186.3%Moonshot AI's run
  40. GLM-5.3-Flash86%Vals.ai's run, MMMU-Pro

The other models in the grid have no result on MMMU-Pro yet.

FactualityAA-Omniscience Accuracy

  1. Claude Fable 5.168.4%
  2. Claude Opus 5.565.5%
  3. Claude Fable 565.4%
  4. GPT-6.1 Sol61.8%
  5. GPT-6 Astra61.6%
  6. Claude Opus 560.9%
  7. Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview54.9%
  8. GPT-6 Sol54.5%
  9. Claude Sonnet 5.551.5%
  10. Gemini 3.8 Flash50.5%
  11. Claude Opus 4.748.9%
  12. Kimi K3.1 Pro48.9%
  13. Claude Opus 4.848.8%
  14. Gemini 4 Argon48.3%
  15. GPT-6.1 Terra47.6%
  16. Claude Opus 4.647%
  17. Claude Opus 4.546.6%
  18. DeepSeek V4 Pro45.2%
  19. MiniMax M3.1 Flash45.1%
  20. Grok 4.742.7%
  21. GPT-5.6 Terra42.3%
  22. Muse Spark Open42%
  23. Claude Sonnet 4.640.9%
  24. Claude Sonnet 540.1%
  25. GPT-6 Luna39.6%
  26. DeepSeek V4.1 Flash39.6%
  27. Muse Wonder38%
  28. Muse Spark 1.338%
  29. Step 5 Preview36.4%
  30. MiMo-V2.6-Pro34.8%
  31. Claude Haiku 5.534.7%
  32. Claude Sonnet 4.532.9%
  33. GLM-5.332.3%
  34. Qwen3.8 Max29.5%
  35. GLM-5.3-Flash28.2%
  36. MiMo-V2.6-Flash27.2%
  37. Ling 3.1 Flash26.5%
  38. Mistral Large 426%
  39. Mistral Medium 3.523%
  40. Claude Haiku 4.518%
  41. Qwen3.8 27B17.3%
  42. GPT-5.6 Sol69.7%Epoch AI's run, SimpleQA Verified
  43. Gemini 3.6 Flash66.2%Epoch AI's run, SimpleQA Verified
  44. GPT-5.563%Epoch AI's run, SimpleQA Verified
  45. Kimi K350.6%Epoch AI's run, SimpleQA Verified
  46. Grok 4.648.9%Epoch AI's run, SimpleQA Verified
  47. Grok 4.548.3%Epoch AI's run, SimpleQA Verified
  48. GPT-5.6 Luna41%Epoch AI's run, SimpleQA Verified
  49. Kimi K2.7 Code36.5%Epoch AI's run, SimpleQA Verified
  50. GLM-5.234.2%Epoch AI's run, SimpleQA Verified
  51. gpt-oss-120b16.8%OpenAI's own figure, SimpleQA
  52. Gemma 4 31B10.4%Epoch AI's run, SimpleQA Verified

The other models in the grid have no result on AA-Omniscience Accuracy yet.

Answers in fullSpeechMap

  1. Grok 4.593.1%
  2. Gemini 3.6 Flash87.2%
  3. Gemini 4 Argon87%
  4. Gemini 3.8 Flash86.1%
  5. Grok 4.683.6%
  6. Claude Opus 5.582.8%
  7. Gemma 4 31B82.3%
  8. Claude Sonnet 5.581.6%
  9. Claude Haiku 5.578.8%
  10. Claude Opus 573.7%
  11. Claude Fable 5.172.4%
  12. DeepSeek V4 Pro72%
  13. GLM-5.371.5%
  14. Mistral Medium 3.570.5%
  15. Claude Opus 4.770.2%
  16. Llama 4 Scout70.1%
  17. GPT-6.1 Sol69.5%
  18. GPT-6 Astra68.2%
  19. Claude Opus 4.867.4%
  20. MiMo-V2.6-Flash66.9%
  21. MiMo-V2.6-Pro66.5%
  22. Kimi K365.9%
  23. GLM-5.3-Flash65.4%
  24. Qwen3.8 Max65.3%
  25. Claude Fable 564.8%
  26. Grok 4.764.1%
  27. GPT-6 Sol64%
  28. GPT-6 Luna63.4%
  29. Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview59.9%
  30. Claude Opus 4.659.9%
  31. Step 5 Preview59.7%
  32. Llama 4 Maverick58.3%
  33. Claude Opus 4.557.5%
  34. Muse Wonder42.7%
  35. gpt-oss-120b36.3%
  36. Claude Sonnet 4.635.8%
  37. Claude Sonnet 4.531.4%
  38. Muse Spark 1.325.8%
  39. Claude Haiku 4.524.7%

The other models in the grid have no result on SpeechMap yet.

Instruction followingMultiChallenge

  1. GPT-6.1 Sol82%
  2. Gemini 4 Argon78.7%
  3. DeepSeek V4.1 Flash74.9%
  4. GPT-6.1 Terra74.2%
  5. Muse Spark Open74.2%
  6. Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview71.4%
  7. Claude Haiku 5.567.7%
  8. Claude Opus 4.559%
  9. Claude Sonnet 4.555.3%
  10. Claude Haiku 4.550.5%
  11. gpt-oss-120b45.3%
  12. Claude Opus 4.637.2%
  13. Qwen3.8 27B79.5%Alibaba's own figure, IFBench
  14. GPT-5.575.9%Artificial Analysis's run, IFBench
  15. Gemma 4 31B75.6%Artificial Analysis's run, IFBench
  16. GPT-5.3-Codex75.4%Artificial Analysis's run, IFBench
  17. GPT-5.473.9%Artificial Analysis's run, IFBench
  18. GLM-5.273.3%Artificial Analysis's run, IFBench
  19. GPT-5.6 Sol72.7%Artificial Analysis's run, IFBench
  20. GPT-5.6 Terra71.2%Artificial Analysis's run, IFBench
  21. Mistral Medium 3.568.8%Artificial Analysis's run, IFBench
  22. Claude Fable 563.5%Artificial Analysis's run, IFBench
  23. Kimi K2.7 Code63.1%Artificial Analysis's run, IFBench
  24. Claude Opus 4.862.2%Artificial Analysis's run, IFBench
  25. Claude Opus 4.758.6%Artificial Analysis's run, IFBench
  26. Claude Sonnet 4.656.6%Artificial Analysis's run, IFBench
  27. Llama 4 Maverick43%Artificial Analysis's run, IFBench
  28. Llama 4 Scout39.5%Artificial Analysis's run, IFBench

The other models in the grid have no result on MultiChallenge yet.

Releases

Every Gemini Pro release we track, newest first.

  1. Gemini 4 ArgonGoogle's Gemini 4 Argon release for advanced reasoning and multimodal work. Google announced it on September 30, 2026 as a limited rollout to cyber defenders in its Fairwind Program; it has been generally available on the Gemini API and Agent Platform since October 13, 2026.CurrentSep 30, 2026
  2. Gemini 3.1 Pro PreviewA preview Gemini Pro release for advanced reasoning and multimodal work.CurrentFeb 19, 2026

What practitioners report

Strongest on Quality and reasoning, weakest on Reliability.

Each figure is the share of accounts naming Gemini 4 Argon that speak well of it on that axis. An axis is scored once praise and concerns are both on record from at least five accounts by three authors. An account from the maker, a company that sells or serves the model, or the maker's expert program is listed and counts toward no figure.

Share of practitioner accounts favorable to Gemini 4 Argon on each of seven axes, with the accounts behind each figure
AxisFavorableAccounts
Quality and reasoningWhether its answers and code are right on the author's own task: reasoning, accuracy, instruction following, and consistency.63%22 favorable, 13 not, 35 authors
Tool use and structured outputWhether it calls tools correctly, returns valid structured output, and keeps agent loops on track.25%2 favorable, 6 not, 8 authors
Long contextHow it holds up over long documents, large codebases, long sessions, and many images or PDFs.25%2 favorable, 6 not, 8 authors
Developer experienceHow it is to build with: prompting, steering, effort settings, and support across SDKs and providers.33%3 favorable, 6 not, 9 authors
CostWhat the work costs: price per task, token use, and what caching and batch save.35%7 favorable, 13 not, 20 authors
SpeedResponse time, time to first token, and throughput.45%5 favorable, 6 not, 11 authors
ReliabilityWhether requests keep succeeding: overloaded errors, outages, rate limits, and changes that broke what worked.5%1 favorable, 18 not, 19 authors
Every model on these seven axes
Share of accounts favorable on each axis for Gemini 4 Argon and every other model GILD has accounts for
AxisGemini 4 ArgonGemini 3.8 FlashGemma 4 31BGemini 3.1 Pro PreviewGemini 3.6 FlashClaude Haiku 5.5Claude Sonnet 5.5Claude Opus 5.5Claude Fable 5.1Claude Opus 5Claude Sonnet 5Claude Fable 5Claude Opus 4.8Claude Opus 4.7Claude Sonnet 4.6Claude Opus 4.6Claude Opus 4.5Claude Haiku 4.5Claude Sonnet 4.5GPT-6.1 TerraGPT-6.1 SolGPT-6 LunaGPT-6 AstraGPT-5.6 SolGPT-5.6 TerraGPT-5.6 LunaGPT-5.5GPT-5.4gpt-oss-120bGPT-6 SolGPT-5.3-CodexDeepSeek V4.1 FlashDeepSeek V4 ProKimi K3.1 ProKimi K3Kimi K2.7 CodeMistral Large 4Mistral Medium 3.5Grok 4.7Grok 4.6Grok 4.5MiniMax M3.1 FlashMercury 3GLM-5.3-FlashGLM-5.3GLM-5.2Muse Spark OpenMuse WonderMuse Spark 1.3Llama 4 ScoutLlama 4 MaverickQwen3.8 27BQwen3.8 MaxMiMo-V2.6-ProMiMo-V2.6-FlashLing 3.1 FlashStep 5 Preview
Quality and reasoning63%22 favorable, 13 not, 35 authors56%27 favorable, 21 not, 45 authors80%24 favorable, 6 not, 28 authors56%20 favorable, 16 not, 36 authorsNeeds 5 accounts from 3 authors1 favorable, 3 not, 4 authors73%19 favorable, 7 not, 26 authors64%14 favorable, 8 not, 22 authors68%17 favorable, 8 not, 25 authors54%15 favorable, 13 not, 28 authors50%6 favorable, 6 not, 12 authors56%9 favorable, 7 not, 16 authors68%13 favorable, 6 not, 18 authors68%17 favorable, 8 not, 25 authors57%12 favorable, 9 not, 21 authors67%12 favorable, 6 not, 18 authors70%19 favorable, 8 not, 27 authors62%13 favorable, 8 not, 20 authors58%14 favorable, 10 not, 24 authors69%11 favorable, 5 not, 16 authors33%3 favorable, 6 not, 8 authors55%12 favorable, 10 not, 22 authors55%16 favorable, 13 not, 29 authors44%12 favorable, 15 not, 26 authors33%3 favorable, 6 not, 9 authors38%3 favorable, 5 not, 8 authorsNeeds 5 accounts from 3 authors3 favorable, 1 not, 4 authors33%4 favorable, 8 not, 12 authors33%2 favorable, 4 not, 6 authors58%22 favorable, 16 not, 38 authors31%10 favorable, 22 not, 32 authorsNeeds 5 accounts from 3 authors1 favorable, 3 not, 4 authors61%25 favorable, 16 not, 40 authorsOnly concerns on record0 favorable, 4 not, 4 authors59%20 favorable, 14 not, 32 authorsOnly praise on record3 favorable, 0 not, 3 authors50%3 favorable, 3 not, 6 authors58%11 favorable, 8 not, 18 authors36%5 favorable, 9 not, 14 authors43%16 favorable, 21 not, 36 authors86%6 favorable, 1 not, 7 authors60%3 favorable, 2 not, 5 authors62%13 favorable, 8 not, 21 authors86%18 favorable, 3 not, 21 authors67%14 favorable, 7 not, 21 authors76%47 favorable, 15 not, 61 authors71%5 favorable, 2 not, 7 authorsNeeds 5 accounts from 3 authors2 favorable, 1 not, 3 authors20%1 favorable, 4 not, 5 authorsOnly praise on record2 favorable, 0 not, 2 authors53%8 favorable, 7 not, 15 authors44%8 favorable, 10 not, 17 authors71%24 favorable, 10 not, 34 authors57%4 favorable, 3 not, 7 authors22%2 favorable, 7 not, 9 authors40%4 favorable, 6 not, 10 authorsOnly concerns on record0 favorable, 1 not, 1 authorNeeds 5 accounts from 3 authors2 favorable, 1 not, 3 authors
Tool use and structured output25%2 favorable, 6 not, 8 authors47%7 favorable, 8 not, 15 authors67%4 favorable, 2 not, 6 authors54%7 favorable, 6 not, 12 authorsOnly concerns on record0 favorable, 1 not, 1 author67%6 favorable, 3 not, 9 authors40%4 favorable, 6 not, 10 authors46%6 favorable, 7 not, 13 authors30%3 favorable, 7 not, 10 authorsNeeds 5 accounts from 3 authors3 favorable, 1 not, 4 authors70%7 favorable, 3 not, 10 authors57%4 favorable, 3 not, 7 authors50%4 favorable, 4 not, 8 authors50%4 favorable, 4 not, 8 authors29%2 favorable, 5 not, 7 authors33%4 favorable, 8 not, 12 authors70%7 favorable, 3 not, 10 authors43%3 favorable, 4 not, 6 authors50%3 favorable, 3 not, 6 authors40%2 favorable, 3 not, 5 authors40%4 favorable, 6 not, 10 authors33%3 favorable, 6 not, 9 authors62%8 favorable, 5 not, 13 authorsNo accounts yetOnly concerns on record0 favorable, 2 not, 2 authorsOnly praise on record1 favorable, 0 not, 1 authorOnly praise on record1 favorable, 0 not, 1 authorNo accounts yet27%4 favorable, 11 not, 15 authors56%5 favorable, 4 not, 9 authorsNo accounts yet59%10 favorable, 7 not, 17 authorsOnly concerns on record0 favorable, 1 not, 1 authorNeeds 5 accounts from 3 authors3 favorable, 1 not, 4 authorsOnly concerns on record0 favorable, 1 not, 1 authorNo accounts yet38%5 favorable, 8 not, 13 authorsOnly concerns on record0 favorable, 5 not, 5 authors38%6 favorable, 10 not, 16 authorsOnly praise on record2 favorable, 0 not, 2 authorsOnly concerns on record0 favorable, 1 not, 1 author67%4 favorable, 2 not, 6 authors80%8 favorable, 2 not, 10 authors33%2 favorable, 4 not, 6 authors57%4 favorable, 3 not, 7 authorsNo accounts yetNo accounts yetOnly concerns on record0 favorable, 1 not, 1 authorNeeds 5 accounts from 3 authors1 favorable, 1 not, 2 authorsNeeds 5 accounts from 3 authors1 favorable, 2 not, 3 authorsOnly concerns on record0 favorable, 4 not, 4 authors46%6 favorable, 7 not, 13 authorsOnly praise on record1 favorable, 0 not, 1 authorOnly concerns on record0 favorable, 5 not, 5 authorsOnly concerns on record0 favorable, 1 not, 1 authorOnly concerns on record0 favorable, 1 not, 1 authorOnly concerns on record0 favorable, 1 not, 1 author
Long context25%2 favorable, 6 not, 8 authors38%5 favorable, 8 not, 13 authors20%1 favorable, 4 not, 5 authors44%7 favorable, 9 not, 16 authorsOnly praise on record1 favorable, 0 not, 1 author29%2 favorable, 5 not, 7 authors60%3 favorable, 2 not, 5 authors80%8 favorable, 2 not, 10 authors63%5 favorable, 3 not, 8 authors67%4 favorable, 2 not, 6 authors50%3 favorable, 3 not, 6 authors33%2 favorable, 4 not, 6 authors60%6 favorable, 4 not, 10 authors50%4 favorable, 4 not, 7 authors71%5 favorable, 2 not, 7 authors64%7 favorable, 4 not, 11 authors40%4 favorable, 6 not, 10 authors40%2 favorable, 3 not, 5 authors50%4 favorable, 4 not, 8 authorsOnly concerns on record0 favorable, 1 not, 1 author38%3 favorable, 5 not, 8 authors20%1 favorable, 4 not, 5 authors27%3 favorable, 8 not, 11 authorsNo accounts yetNo accounts yetOnly concerns on record0 favorable, 1 not, 1 authorOnly concerns on record0 favorable, 1 not, 1 authorNeeds 5 accounts from 3 authors2 favorable, 1 not, 3 authors25%2 favorable, 6 not, 8 authorsOnly concerns on record0 favorable, 3 not, 3 authorsNo accounts yet58%7 favorable, 5 not, 12 authorsNo accounts yetNeeds 5 accounts from 3 authors3 favorable, 1 not, 4 authorsOnly praise on record1 favorable, 0 not, 1 authorOnly concerns on record0 favorable, 1 not, 1 authorNeeds 5 accounts from 3 authors1 favorable, 3 not, 4 authorsNo accounts yet42%5 favorable, 7 not, 12 authorsNo accounts yetNo accounts yet40%2 favorable, 3 not, 5 authors60%3 favorable, 2 not, 5 authorsNo accounts yet40%2 favorable, 3 not, 5 authorsNo accounts yetNo accounts yetOnly concerns on record0 favorable, 1 not, 1 authorOnly concerns on record0 favorable, 1 not, 1 authorOnly concerns on record0 favorable, 3 not, 3 authorsNeeds 5 accounts from 3 authors2 favorable, 1 not, 3 authors75%6 favorable, 2 not, 8 authorsOnly praise on record1 favorable, 0 not, 1 authorNeeds 5 accounts from 3 authors1 favorable, 1 not, 2 authorsNeeds 5 accounts from 3 authors1 favorable, 1 not, 2 authorsNo accounts yetNo accounts yet
Developer experience33%3 favorable, 6 not, 9 authors39%7 favorable, 11 not, 17 authorsOnly concerns on record0 favorable, 7 not, 7 authors40%8 favorable, 12 not, 20 authorsNo accounts yet25%2 favorable, 6 not, 8 authors38%5 favorable, 8 not, 13 authors38%6 favorable, 10 not, 16 authors50%7 favorable, 7 not, 14 authors25%3 favorable, 9 not, 12 authors29%2 favorable, 5 not, 7 authors25%3 favorable, 9 not, 12 authors53%10 favorable, 9 not, 19 authors29%4 favorable, 10 not, 14 authors57%4 favorable, 3 not, 7 authors45%5 favorable, 6 not, 11 authors67%8 favorable, 4 not, 12 authorsNeeds 5 accounts from 3 authors2 favorable, 2 not, 4 authors50%3 favorable, 3 not, 6 authorsOnly concerns on record0 favorable, 2 not, 2 authors27%3 favorable, 8 not, 11 authors25%2 favorable, 6 not, 8 authors41%7 favorable, 10 not, 17 authorsNo accounts yetOnly concerns on record0 favorable, 1 not, 1 authorNo accounts yetNo accounts yetNo accounts yet14%1 favorable, 6 not, 7 authors25%3 favorable, 9 not, 12 authorsNo accounts yet35%8 favorable, 15 not, 23 authorsNo accounts yet9%1 favorable, 10 not, 11 authorsNo accounts yetOnly concerns on record0 favorable, 1 not, 1 author13%2 favorable, 14 not, 16 authorsOnly concerns on record0 favorable, 9 not, 9 authors25%5 favorable, 15 not, 20 authorsNo accounts yetNo accounts yetOnly concerns on record0 favorable, 7 not, 7 authors11%1 favorable, 8 not, 9 authorsOnly concerns on record0 favorable, 3 not, 3 authors33%5 favorable, 10 not, 15 authorsNo accounts yetOnly concerns on record0 favorable, 1 not, 1 authorOnly concerns on record0 favorable, 1 not, 1 authorNo accounts yetOnly concerns on record0 favorable, 6 not, 6 authorsOnly concerns on record0 favorable, 1 not, 1 author17%1 favorable, 5 not, 6 authorsOnly concerns on record0 favorable, 1 not, 1 authorOnly concerns on record0 favorable, 1 not, 1 authorOnly concerns on record0 favorable, 1 not, 1 authorNo accounts yetNo accounts yet
Cost35%7 favorable, 13 not, 20 authors58%14 favorable, 10 not, 23 authorsOnly praise on record7 favorable, 0 not, 7 authors50%8 favorable, 8 not, 16 authorsOnly concerns on record0 favorable, 1 not, 1 author69%20 favorable, 9 not, 29 authors45%10 favorable, 12 not, 22 authors56%15 favorable, 12 not, 27 authors20%4 favorable, 16 not, 20 authors43%3 favorable, 4 not, 7 authors39%7 favorable, 11 not, 17 authors8%1 favorable, 11 not, 12 authors40%6 favorable, 9 not, 14 authors50%7 favorable, 7 not, 13 authors50%6 favorable, 6 not, 12 authors33%7 favorable, 14 not, 20 authors53%8 favorable, 7 not, 15 authors29%4 favorable, 10 not, 12 authors38%3 favorable, 5 not, 8 authors80%8 favorable, 2 not, 9 authors74%14 favorable, 5 not, 19 authors79%22 favorable, 6 not, 26 authors29%7 favorable, 17 not, 23 authors57%4 favorable, 3 not, 7 authorsOnly concerns on record0 favorable, 1 not, 1 author50%3 favorable, 3 not, 6 authorsNeeds 5 accounts from 3 authors1 favorable, 3 not, 4 authors63%5 favorable, 3 not, 8 authors60%3 favorable, 2 not, 5 authors55%12 favorable, 10 not, 21 authorsNeeds 5 accounts from 3 authors2 favorable, 1 not, 3 authors66%25 favorable, 13 not, 37 authorsOnly praise on record2 favorable, 0 not, 2 authors40%10 favorable, 15 not, 25 authors71%5 favorable, 2 not, 7 authorsNeeds 5 accounts from 3 authors1 favorable, 3 not, 4 authors27%3 favorable, 8 not, 11 authorsOnly concerns on record0 favorable, 8 not, 8 authors19%5 favorable, 21 not, 26 authors20%1 favorable, 4 not, 5 authorsOnly praise on record4 favorable, 0 not, 4 authors80%12 favorable, 3 not, 15 authors50%6 favorable, 6 not, 12 authors76%16 favorable, 5 not, 21 authors35%8 favorable, 15 not, 23 authors71%5 favorable, 2 not, 7 authorsOnly concerns on record0 favorable, 1 not, 1 authorOnly concerns on record0 favorable, 9 not, 9 authorsNeeds 5 accounts from 3 authors2 favorable, 1 not, 3 authorsOnly praise on record1 favorable, 0 not, 1 authorOnly praise on record1 favorable, 0 not, 1 authorNeeds 5 accounts from 3 authors2 favorable, 2 not, 4 authorsOnly concerns on record0 favorable, 2 not, 2 authorsNeeds 5 accounts from 3 authors1 favorable, 1 not, 2 authorsOnly praise on record3 favorable, 0 not, 3 authorsOnly praise on record1 favorable, 0 not, 1 authorOnly praise on record1 favorable, 0 not, 1 author
Speed45%5 favorable, 6 not, 11 authors61%19 favorable, 12 not, 31 authors53%10 favorable, 9 not, 17 authors35%6 favorable, 11 not, 16 authorsNeeds 5 accounts from 3 authors2 favorable, 1 not, 3 authors74%14 favorable, 5 not, 19 authors88%14 favorable, 2 not, 16 authors46%6 favorable, 7 not, 13 authors44%4 favorable, 5 not, 9 authors60%3 favorable, 2 not, 5 authors44%4 favorable, 5 not, 9 authors57%4 favorable, 3 not, 7 authors31%4 favorable, 9 not, 13 authors63%5 favorable, 3 not, 8 authors17%1 favorable, 5 not, 6 authors36%4 favorable, 7 not, 11 authors73%8 favorable, 3 not, 11 authors78%7 favorable, 2 not, 9 authors75%6 favorable, 2 not, 8 authors83%5 favorable, 1 not, 5 authors37%7 favorable, 12 not, 19 authors45%5 favorable, 6 not, 11 authors41%7 favorable, 10 not, 17 authorsOnly praise on record1 favorable, 0 not, 1 authorNeeds 5 accounts from 3 authors1 favorable, 1 not, 2 authors80%4 favorable, 1 not, 5 authorsNeeds 5 accounts from 3 authors1 favorable, 1 not, 2 authorsNo accounts yet85%23 favorable, 4 not, 27 authors57%4 favorable, 3 not, 7 authorsOnly praise on record1 favorable, 0 not, 1 author68%21 favorable, 10 not, 30 authorsOnly concerns on record0 favorable, 1 not, 1 author21%4 favorable, 15 not, 19 authorsOnly concerns on record0 favorable, 2 not, 2 authorsNo accounts yet21%3 favorable, 11 not, 14 authorsOnly concerns on record0 favorable, 2 not, 2 authors29%5 favorable, 12 not, 17 authorsNeeds 5 accounts from 3 authors1 favorable, 2 not, 3 authorsOnly praise on record2 favorable, 0 not, 2 authors44%4 favorable, 5 not, 9 authors65%13 favorable, 7 not, 20 authors33%3 favorable, 6 not, 9 authors20%3 favorable, 12 not, 15 authorsNeeds 5 accounts from 3 authors1 favorable, 1 not, 2 authorsOnly concerns on record0 favorable, 1 not, 1 authorOnly concerns on record0 favorable, 1 not, 1 authorNeeds 5 accounts from 3 authors1 favorable, 1 not, 2 authorsNeeds 5 accounts from 3 authors3 favorable, 1 not, 4 authorsNo accounts yet33%7 favorable, 14 not, 21 authorsNeeds 5 accounts from 3 authors1 favorable, 3 not, 4 authorsOnly concerns on record0 favorable, 4 not, 4 authorsOnly concerns on record0 favorable, 1 not, 1 authorOnly concerns on record0 favorable, 2 not, 2 authorsOnly concerns on record0 favorable, 1 not, 1 author
Reliability5%1 favorable, 18 not, 19 authors15%3 favorable, 17 not, 20 authorsOnly concerns on record0 favorable, 5 not, 5 authors14%3 favorable, 19 not, 22 authorsOnly concerns on record0 favorable, 1 not, 1 author20%1 favorable, 4 not, 5 authors18%2 favorable, 9 not, 11 authors13%1 favorable, 7 not, 8 authors9%1 favorable, 10 not, 11 authors13%1 favorable, 7 not, 8 authors63%5 favorable, 3 not, 7 authors22%2 favorable, 7 not, 9 authors17%2 favorable, 10 not, 12 authors18%2 favorable, 9 not, 11 authors17%1 favorable, 5 not, 6 authors20%3 favorable, 12 not, 15 authors38%6 favorable, 10 not, 16 authors29%2 favorable, 5 not, 7 authors40%4 favorable, 6 not, 10 authorsOnly concerns on record0 favorable, 1 not, 1 author13%1 favorable, 7 not, 8 authorsOnly concerns on record0 favorable, 5 not, 5 authors14%2 favorable, 12 not, 14 authorsOnly concerns on record0 favorable, 4 not, 4 authorsOnly concerns on record0 favorable, 1 not, 1 authorNo accounts yetOnly concerns on record0 favorable, 2 not, 2 authorsOnly concerns on record0 favorable, 4 not, 4 authorsOnly concerns on record0 favorable, 4 not, 4 authors17%1 favorable, 5 not, 6 authorsOnly concerns on record0 favorable, 3 not, 3 authors42%5 favorable, 7 not, 12 authorsNeeds 5 accounts from 3 authors1 favorable, 1 not, 2 authors8%1 favorable, 12 not, 13 authorsOnly concerns on record0 favorable, 1 not, 1 authorNeeds 5 accounts from 3 authors1 favorable, 1 not, 2 authors38%3 favorable, 5 not, 8 authorsOnly concerns on record0 favorable, 4 not, 4 authors22%2 favorable, 7 not, 9 authorsOnly concerns on record0 favorable, 1 not, 1 authorNo accounts yet60%3 favorable, 2 not, 5 authors33%2 favorable, 4 not, 5 authorsOnly concerns on record0 favorable, 7 not, 7 authorsOnly concerns on record0 favorable, 4 not, 4 authorsOnly concerns on record0 favorable, 1 not, 1 authorNo accounts yetOnly concerns on record0 favorable, 2 not, 2 authorsOnly concerns on record0 favorable, 1 not, 1 authorNeeds 5 accounts from 3 authors1 favorable, 3 not, 4 authorsOnly concerns on record0 favorable, 1 not, 1 authorOnly concerns on record0 favorable, 9 not, 9 authorsOnly concerns on record0 favorable, 1 not, 1 authorOnly concerns on record0 favorable, 2 not, 2 authorsNo accounts yetNo accounts yetOnly concerns on record0 favorable, 1 not, 1 author
The 82 accounts behind Gemini 4 Argon's figures

GILD searched Hacker News, GitHub, Reddit, X, Artificial Analysis, the Google AI Developers Forum and the web for accounts that name Gemini 4 Argon.

Quality and reasoning 63%

  • Favorable
    amongst the leading models in intelligence

    Artificial Analysis - Gemini 4 Argon. Artificial Analysis, independent benchmark publisher, self-described, Oct 26, 2026. Gemini 4 Argon (reasoning).

  • Favorable
    11 small bug fixes from my own projects). It solved 10 of 11

    Own coding eval of Gemini 4 Argon via OpenRouter. ariwilson, Hacker News commenter, self-described, Oct 13, 2026. Gemini 4 Argon via OpenRouter in the pi harness, 11 small bug fixes.

  • Favorable
    Argon is a near-frontier model for engineering design, code analysis, and chat

    Gertlabs evaluation of Gemini 4 Argon in 100 coding environments. gertlabs, account for the Gertlabs model rankings (gertlabs.com), self-described, Oct 14, 2026. Gemini 4 Argon in 100 competitive and cooperative coding environments.

  • Unfavorable
    it seems to be doing worse than 3.8 flash in some coding tasks

    First day of Gemini 4 Argon on mid-sized coding tasks. Revanche1367, Hacker News commenter, self-described, Oct 14, 2026. Gemini 4 Argon on complex mid-sized real world coding tasks.

  • Favorable
    Excellent model. Same price and score as Opus 5.5 in our 23 question exam.

    Gemini 4 Argon on a data analytics benchmark. chriddyp, Hacker News commenter posting the Plotly data analytics benchmark, self-described, Oct 14, 2026. Gemini 4 Argon on a 23 question data analytics exam (Plotly blog benchmark).

  • Favorable
    I'm extremely impressed with Argon thus far

    Impressed with Gemini 4 Argon. A_D_E_P_T, Hacker News commenter, self-described, Oct 13, 2026. Gemini 4 Argon in early use after general availability.

  • Favorable
    I would say as good as Opus 5.5

    Gemini 4 Argon on a Pac Man bakeoff. thefourthchime, Hacker News commenter, self-described, Oct 13, 2026. Gemini 4 Argon in the author's Pac Man bakeoff against Opus 5.5.

  • Unfavorable
    I'd put it at B tier, just under gpt 6.1 sol

    Image to HTML test for Gemini 4 Argon. jjcm, Hacker News commenter, self-described, Oct 13, 2026. Gemini 4 Argon on the author's image to HTML test.

  • Favorable
    this is the first time I get something that, while still needing some tweaks, basically looks like the patch sheet

    Gemini 4 Argon builds an HTML synth patch sheet. fipar, Hacker News commenter, self-described, Oct 14, 2026. Gemini 4 Argon turning a synth patch sheet image into HTML.

  • Unfavorable
    argon is not even close to Opus 5.5 or even 6.1 Sol

    Gemini 4 Argon not close to Opus 5.5. chaostheory, Hacker News commenter, self-described, Oct 16, 2026. Gemini 4 Argon compared with Opus 5.5, GPT 6.1 Sol and Gemini 3.1 Pro.

  • Favorable
    I just tried Gemini 4 Argon and it seems to have nailed it

    Gemini 4 Argon on handwritten journal OCR. jiggawatts, Hacker News commenter, self-described, Oct 14, 2026. Gemini 4 Argon in AI Studio on a handwritten journal OCR task.

  • Favorable
    is an acceptably high quality model for coding

    Gemini 4 Argon on the $20 Google plan. SwellJoe, Hacker News commenter, self-described, Oct 23, 2026. Gemini 4 Argon on the $20 Google AI subscription.

  • Favorable
    It did it, as well as I would have and in much less time

    Gemini 4 Argon builds a payments web app. mpyne, Hacker News commenter, self-described, Oct 19, 2026. Gemini 4 Argon (Google Argon 4) set to high, building a web app.

  • Unfavorable
    I don't find Argon to be usable for any big tasks because it really does a big mess every now and then

    Gemini 4 Argon not usable for big tasks. egeozcan, Hacker News commenter, self-described, Oct 24, 2026. Argon (Gemini 4 Argon) on big coding tasks, compared with Astra.

  • Unfavorable
    Other models, like Muse Wonder and Argon, are a total waste of time

    Gemini 4 Argon a waste of time for software work. a3nz3g, Hacker News commenter, self-described, Oct 24, 2026. Argon (Gemini 4 Argon) for software development, compared with Opus and Sol.

  • Unfavorable
    Argon is the worst model. Wrecked multiple codebases.

    Gemini 4 Argon wrecked codebases. theturtletalks, Hacker News commenter, self-described, Oct 15, 2026. Argon (Gemini 4 Argon) in the author's software factory.

  • Favorable
    Argon is exceptional at writing tasks

    Gemini 4 Argon on writing tasks. heyjamesknight, Hacker News commenter, self-described, Oct 14, 2026. Argon (Gemini 4 Argon) on writing tasks.

  • Favorable
    Argon just flat out writes better

    Gemini 4 Argon writes better than Opus. mwigdahl, Hacker News commenter, self-described, Oct 14, 2026. Argon (Gemini 4 Argon) for writing, compared with Opus 5.5.

  • Favorable
    In contrast, Argon was the first model to

    Gemini 4 Argon explains an OCT scan. sebmellen, Hacker News commenter, self-described, Oct 13, 2026. Argon (Gemini 4 Argon) explaining retina OCT scan results.

  • Favorable
    was quite shocked how well it did it

    Gemini Argon improves multiplayer latency. agge, Hacker News commenter, self-described, Oct 19, 2026. Gemini Argon (Gemini 4 Argon) on a multiplayer game's networking code.

  • Unfavorable
    Astra still outperforms Argon for me.

    Astra outperforms Gemini 4 Argon. drivebyhooting, Hacker News commenter, self-described, Oct 15, 2026. Argon (Gemini 4 Argon) compared with GPT-6 Astra.

  • Unfavorable
    The results are a bit disappointing given Googles scale and training data.

    Gemini 4 Argon on a video creation benchmark. dsco, Hacker News commenter, self-described, Oct 13, 2026. Gemini 4 Argon on the cliphou.se video creation benchmark.

  • Favorable
    the model has been a delight so far

    Gemini 4 Argon via the API for writing. postalcoder, Hacker News commenter, self-described, Oct 13, 2026. Gemini 4 Argon via the API.

  • Favorable
    I'm using Gemini Argon 4 now with antigravity cli and it can absolutely code.

    Gemini 4 Argon in Antigravity CLI can code. etoxin, Hacker News commenter, self-described, Oct 13, 2026. Gemini 4 Argon (Gemini Argon 4) with Antigravity CLI.

  • Unfavorable
    its coding performance is underwhelming

    How Bad Is Gemini 4 Argon?. Suparva, Google AI Developers Forum user, self-described, Oct 16, 2026. Gemini 4 Argon for coding.

  • Favorable
    the thought process was remarkably responsive and well-structured

    First impressions of Gemini 4 Argon in the Antigravity app. Roedy_Rustam, Google AI Developers Forum user, self-described, Oct 23, 2026. Gemini 4 Argon Medium in the Antigravity app on TypeScript refactoring.

  • Favorable
    Argon almost always spots flaws Flash missed and cleans up the logic

    Best Antigravity workflow for now: Flash 3.8 + Argon. Shvan, Google AI Developers Forum user, self-described, Oct 18, 2026. Gemini 4 Argon in the Gemini app reviewing plans drafted by 3.8 Flash.

  • Unfavorable
    repeatedly engaged in specification gaming (reward hacking) and fabricated completion reporting

    Gemini 4 Argon High engages in specification gaming. K.Kazantzoglou, Google AI Developers Forum user, self-described, Oct 22, 2026. Gemini 4 Argon (High) in Google Antigravity on an enterprise engineering evaluation.

  • Favorable
    All without changing a single pixel, that too in one attempt.

    Gemini 4 Argon refactors a 4,290 line file. thebuggeddev, self-described software developer, Oct 15, 2026. Gemini 4 Argon refactoring its own 3D website.

  • Favorable
    landing very close to Opus 5.5 (max)

    Gemini Argon 4 on real work in Antigravity CLI. PawelHuryn, X user, self-described, Oct 14, 2026. Gemini 4 Argon (Gemini Argon 4) with Antigravity CLI on the author's real work benchmark.

  • Unfavorable
    Hallucinations haven't gone anywhere.

    Gemini 4 Argon first impressions. Gegam245074, X user, self-described, Oct 14, 2026. Gemini 4 Argon on a Node.js project and chat.

  • Unfavorable
    passed every quality gate I have and still made my code worse

    Gemini 4 Argon gamed the quality gates. Foxfire1st, X user, self-described, Oct 24, 2026. Gemini 4 Argon in OpenCode on a typed Python codebase.

  • Favorable
    the best model I've used for learning

    Gemini 4 Argon reliable on the flex endpoint. gst_enjoyer, X user, self-described, Oct 25, 2026. Gemini 4 Argon on the flex endpoint, for learning.

  • Unfavorable
    but the output quality? i'm not fully sold yet.

    Gemini 4 Argon High vibe check. parves075, X user, self-described, Oct 23, 2026. Gemini 4 Argon High on the author's vibe check prompt.

  • Favorable
    Argon is also good at coding.

    Gemini 4 Argon impressions. pankajkumar_dev, X user, self-described, Oct 14, 2026. Gemini 4 Argon on 3D, frontend and coding tasks.

  • Favorable
    Argon ties Fable 5 at the top of the Cursor leaderboard on security

    Gemini 4 Argon on Cursor: solid security score, two unique solves, but slower and more expensive. Endor Labs, application security company; post by Luca Compagna, self-described, Oct 20, 2026. Gemini 4 Argon in the Cursor harness on the Agent Security League tasks.

  • Favorable
    Google returns to the top spot on our overall vision benchmark

    Google Is Back! Gemini 4 Argon Leads Our Vision Benchmark. Roboflow, computer vision platform; post by Piotr Skalski, self-described, Oct 15, 2026. Gemini 4 Argon at low and high effort on Roboflow's vision benchmark.

  • Favorable
    As expected, they are all excellent

    Release: llm-gemini 0.35. Simon Willison, creator of Datasette and the LLM tool, self-described, Oct 13, 2026. Gemini 4 Argon via the Gemini API in llm-gemini 0.35, low, medium and high.

  • Favorable
    I'd put it at around Opus 5.5.

    Gemini 4: Argon - Early Access Review. JK Gunnink, Google Developer Expert and founder of RocketFlag, self-described, Oct 20, 2026. Gemini 4 Argon on high reasoning in Antigravity across three coding projects. The author is in the maker's expert program, so this account counts toward no figure.

Tool use and structured output 25%

  • Favorable
    older Google models struggled to work efficiently in a harness. They seem to have solved that with Argon

    Gertlabs evaluation of Gemini 4 Argon in 100 coding environments. gertlabs, account for the Gertlabs model rankings (gertlabs.com), self-described, Oct 14, 2026. Gemini 4 Argon in 100 competitive and cooperative coding environments.

  • Unfavorable
    multi-turn tool loops fail with upstream HTTP 400

    Missing thought_signature on tool calling with gemini-4-argon. Likhixang, GitHub issue author on codex2api, self-described, Oct 16, 2026. gemini-4-argon (Gemini 4 Argon) through codex2api with an Antigravity account, multi-turn function calling.

  • Unfavorable
    Argon rejects exactly the requests that carry an image tool result

    Gemini 4 Argon fails on the native Gemini provider. hekcu, GitHub issue author on mixdog, self-described, Oct 14, 2026. gemini-4-argon (Gemini 4 Argon) via the Gemini API in Mixdog Desktop 1.2.1.

  • Unfavorable
    This interrupts useful tool work.

    Gemini 4 Argon repeats passages in a single SSE response. ning_ke, Google AI Developers Forum user, self-described, Oct 22, 2026. gemini-4-argon (Gemini 4 Argon High) through the Antigravity Cloud Code streaming endpoint, about 360k input tokens.

  • Unfavorable
    one response contained repeated commentary followed by two distinct tool calls requesting the same action

    Gemini 4 Argon repeats passages (reply). Ben_Wu, Google AI Developers Forum user, self-described, Oct 23, 2026. Gemini 4 Argon in long-running Claude Code sessions through CLIProxyAPI.

  • Unfavorable
    both disappear when I require structured JSON

    Gemini 4 Argon thinking summaries missing with structured JSON. atlas-founder, Google AI Developers Forum user, self-described, Oct 22, 2026. gemini-4-argon (Gemini 4 Argon) via the Gemini API with responseSchema.

  • Favorable
    one repair passed my checker in 3 of 3 live runs

    Gemini 4 Argon with Managed Agents for a fixture tool. SidraMiconi, X user, self-described, Oct 25, 2026. Gemini 4 Argon with Managed Agents via REST.

  • Unfavorable
    Argon is definitely not built for agentic tasks

    Gemini 4 Argon first impressions. Gegam245074, X user, self-described, Oct 14, 2026. Gemini 4 Argon on a Node.js project and chat.

  • Favorable
    Argon also tops our leaderboard for JSON data extraction

    Google Is Back! Gemini 4 Argon Leads Our Vision Benchmark. Roboflow, computer vision platform; post by Piotr Skalski, self-described, Oct 15, 2026. Gemini 4 Argon at low and high effort on Roboflow's vision benchmark.

  • Favorable
    It was able to connect to my phone and pull in debug logs and crashes, fix them automatically

    Gemini 4: Argon - Early Access Review. JK Gunnink, Google Developer Expert and founder of RocketFlag, self-described, Oct 20, 2026. Gemini 4 Argon on high reasoning in Antigravity across three coding projects. The author is in the maker's expert program, so this account counts toward no figure.

Long context 25%

  • Unfavorable
    I found Argon subpar with any long context work sadly

    Gemini 4 Argon subpar on long context. kuberwastaken, Hacker News commenter, self-described, Oct 21, 2026. Argon (Gemini 4 Argon) on long context work.

  • Unfavorable
    With memory enabled and a big codebase, Argon shits the bed.

    How Bad Is Gemini 4 Argon? (reply). Christopher_Hawkes, Google AI Developers Forum user, self-described, Oct 21, 2026. Argon (Gemini 4 Argon) with memory enabled on a big codebase.

  • Favorable
    Multi-file execution stability holds up nicely during TypeScript codebase analysis without dropping context

    First impressions of Gemini 4 Argon in the Antigravity app. Roedy_Rustam, Google AI Developers Forum user, self-described, Oct 23, 2026. Gemini 4 Argon Medium in the Antigravity app on TypeScript refactoring.

  • Unfavorable
    In long-context, multi-turn coding conversations with tool history, Gemini 4 Argon intermittently restarts the same commentary

    Gemini 4 Argon repeats passages in a single SSE response. ning_ke, Google AI Developers Forum user, self-described, Oct 22, 2026. gemini-4-argon (Gemini 4 Argon High) through the Antigravity Cloud Code streaming endpoint, about 360k input tokens.

  • Unfavorable
    reproduced this on Argon Medium as well around the 130k-160k context mark each time

    Gemini 4 Argon repeats passages (reply). Matt_Sayles, Google AI Developers Forum user, self-described, Oct 23, 2026. Gemini 4 Argon Medium in long sessions.

  • Unfavorable
    Carbon looks to fix Argon's reliability and long-horizon weaknesses

    Argon's reliability and long-horizon weaknesses. MaaSonder (Qwinah), self-described AI researcher and creator, Oct 23, 2026. Gemini 4 Argon compared with the upcoming Gemini Carbon.

  • Favorable
    It literally turned a 4,290 line monolithic HTML file into modular ES6 architecture

    Gemini 4 Argon refactors a 4,290 line file. thebuggeddev, self-described software developer, Oct 15, 2026. Gemini 4 Argon refactoring its own 3D website.

  • Unfavorable
    Gemini is unfit for working with large codebases. It just gets lost

    Gemini 4 Argon first impressions. Gegam245074, X user, self-described, Oct 14, 2026. Gemini 4 Argon on a Node.js project and chat.

  • Favorable
    identified 32 valid issues without blowing the context window

    Gemini 4: Argon - Early Access Review. JK Gunnink, Google Developer Expert and founder of RocketFlag, self-described, Oct 20, 2026. Gemini 4 Argon on high reasoning in Antigravity across three coding projects. The author is in the maker's expert program, so this account counts toward no figure.

Developer experience 33%

  • Unfavorable
    it ignored my instructions to discuss things with me before deciding to shift away from my draft

    First day of Gemini 4 Argon on mid-sized coding tasks. Revanche1367, Hacker News commenter, self-described, Oct 14, 2026. Gemini 4 Argon on complex mid-sized real world coding tasks.

  • Favorable
    Corrects the mistakes quickly with direction.

    Gemini 4 Argon on a six step 3D explainer test. tezza, Hacker News commenter, self-described, Oct 13, 2026. Gemini 4 Argon (Google Argon 4) in the Gemini app on the author's standard six step 3D explainer test.

  • Unfavorable
    They require way too much effort to get things working

    Gemini 4 Argon a waste of time for software work. a3nz3g, Hacker News commenter, self-described, Oct 24, 2026. Argon (Gemini 4 Argon) for software development, compared with Opus and Sol.

  • Unfavorable
    tends to read all the related and unrelated files into the context

    Gemini Argon reads unrelated files into context. millaker, Hacker News commenter, self-described, Oct 16, 2026. Gemini 4 Argon and Flash 3.8 in a coding agent, compared with Opus 5.5.

  • Unfavorable
    I noticed Argon compacting well under the 1M max in Copilot (around 400k)

    Gemini 4 Argon compacts early in Copilot. dudeinhawaii, Hacker News commenter, self-described, Oct 14, 2026. Gemini 4 Argon in GitHub Copilot with the 1M context setting.

  • Favorable
    After a few simple eval loops of you correcting things into your own voice you can have it sound almost exactly like you

    Gemini 4 Argon on writing tasks. heyjamesknight, Hacker News commenter, self-described, Oct 14, 2026. Argon (Gemini 4 Argon) on writing tasks.

  • Unfavorable
    Surprisingly its safety guardrail gets triggered a lot just like for Fable 5.1.

    Gemini 4 Argon on an adversarial programming language test. dom96, Hacker News commenter, self-described, Oct 13, 2026. Gemini 4 Argon on the KillSwitch adversarial programming language benchmark.

  • Favorable
    gemini-4-argon routes cleanly

    Gemini 4 Argon through ADK. Nabzx, mnemosyne maintainer on GitHub, self-described, Oct 20, 2026. gemini-4-argon (Gemini 4 Argon) through Google ADK v2.12.0.

  • Unfavorable
    It usually takes 2-3 iterations to get the output right.

    Gemini 4 Argon impressions. pankajkumar_dev, X user, self-described, Oct 14, 2026. Gemini 4 Argon on 3D, frontend and coding tasks.

  • Unfavorable
    where I spent a lot of time having to steer it

    Gemini 4: Argon - Early Access Review. JK Gunnink, Google Developer Expert and founder of RocketFlag, self-described, Oct 20, 2026. Gemini 4 Argon on high reasoning in Antigravity across three coding projects. The author is in the maker's expert program, so this account counts toward no figure.

Cost 35%

  • Favorable
    reasonably priced when comparing to other models of similar price

    Artificial Analysis - Gemini 4 Argon. Artificial Analysis, independent benchmark publisher, self-described, Oct 26, 2026. Gemini 4 Argon (reasoning).

  • Unfavorable
    a median run cost me $0.52 vs $0.18 for Sonnet and $0.09 for Sol

    Own coding eval of Gemini 4 Argon via OpenRouter. ariwilson, Hacker News commenter, self-described, Oct 13, 2026. Gemini 4 Argon via OpenRouter in the pi harness, 11 small bug fixes.

  • Unfavorable
    OpenAI 6.1-Sol, Haiku 5.5, GLM 5.3 Flash all achieve about the same results but for ~1/10th the cost

    Gemini 4 Argon on a data analytics benchmark. chriddyp, Hacker News commenter posting the Plotly data analytics benchmark, self-described, Oct 14, 2026. Gemini 4 Argon on a 23 question data analytics exam (Plotly blog benchmark).

  • Favorable
    it was slightly cheaper

    Gemini 4 Argon on a Pac Man bakeoff. thefourthchime, Hacker News commenter, self-described, Oct 13, 2026. Gemini 4 Argon in the author's Pac Man bakeoff against Opus 5.5.

  • Unfavorable
    I basically never exhaust my quota even when working over multiple projects, but this was pretty much immediate

    Gemini 4 Argon exhausts the Ultra quota. robotmay, Hacker News commenter, self-described, Oct 13, 2026. Gemini 4 Argon on the Google AI Ultra plan, auditing a project.

  • Unfavorable
    already spent like 10% of the weekly usage, in less than 10 mins

    Gemini 4 Argon in Antigravity burns weekly usage. equasar, Hacker News commenter, self-described, Oct 17, 2026. Gemini 4 Argon (Google's Argon model) via Antigravity on a small code review.

  • Unfavorable
    using Gemini Argon 4 on High for a few sessions supposedly used $26 of my $60 usage and burned up my weekly request limit already

    Gemini 4 Argon High burns the weekly limit. robertlane0, Hacker News commenter, self-described, Oct 15, 2026. Gemini 4 Argon (Gemini Argon 4) on High in a subscription plan.

  • Favorable
    the best $20 subscription deal these days is probably from Google, now that Gemini 4 Argon exists

    Gemini 4 Argon on the $20 Google plan. SwellJoe, Hacker News commenter, self-described, Oct 23, 2026. Gemini 4 Argon on the $20 Google AI subscription.

  • Favorable
    I just set it to high and supervised it, it cost about $2

    Gemini 4 Argon builds a payments web app. mpyne, Hacker News commenter, self-described, Oct 19, 2026. Gemini 4 Argon (Google Argon 4) set to high, building a web app.

  • Unfavorable
    it is hard to see this as competitive

    Gemini 4 Argon pricing against Artificial Analysis cost per task. GodelNumbering, Hacker News commenter, self-described, Sep 30, 2026. Gemini 4 Argon launch pricing and Artificial Analysis cost per task.

  • Unfavorable
    Sol 6.1 scores one point less than Gemini 4 on intelligence AND costs less than half ($0.72 vs $1.99) per task

    Gemini 4 Argon cost per task against Sol 6.1. nl, Hacker News commenter, self-described, Oct 1, 2026. Gemini 4 (Argon) on Artificial Analysis cost per task, compared with Sol 6.1.

  • Favorable
    Gemini 4 Argon is a new leader in Pareto-frontier

    Gemini 4 Argon on the Arena Pareto frontier. mridulmalpani, Hacker News commenter, self-described, Oct 13, 2026. Gemini 4 Argon on the Arena agent Pareto leaderboard.

  • Favorable
    strong value for capability

    Crackme reverse engineering benchmark across models. nekitamo, Hacker News commenter, self-described, Oct 24, 2026. Gemini 4 Argon on the author's crackme reverse engineering benchmark with Ghidrasql.

  • Unfavorable
    it is expensive on the usage, I just accidentally filled my 5h window with a few questions

    Locking Gemini 4 Argon behind AI Ultra (reply). Ernst_Schacherl, Google AI Developers Forum user, self-described, Oct 14, 2026. Argon (Gemini 4 Argon) in the Gemini UI.

  • Unfavorable
    at draining your tokens

    Locking Gemini 4 Argon behind AI Ultra (reply). oviri, Google AI Developers Forum user, self-described, Oct 14, 2026. Argon (Gemini 4 Argon) on a Google AI subscription.

  • Unfavorable
    multi-step tasks on gemini-4-argon (High) deplete the Google AI Pro weekly quota bar faster than claude-opus-5-5 (High)

    Gemini 4 Argon depletes Antigravity quota faster than Opus 5.5. Muhammed_Alpler, Google AI Developers Forum user, self-described, Oct 19, 2026. gemini-4-argon (Gemini 4 Argon High) in Antigravity on Google AI Pro.

  • Unfavorable
    Argon burned through the entire $10

    Gemini 4 Argon burned $10 on one coding task. Its_lakshya_ai, X user, self-described, Oct 21, 2026. Gemini 4 Argon in Antigravity and Gemini CLI on one coding task.

  • Favorable
    The lower cost comes from using fewer tokens and more cache hits.

    Gemini Argon 4 on real work in Antigravity CLI. PawelHuryn, X user, self-described, Oct 14, 2026. Gemini 4 Argon (Gemini Argon 4) with Antigravity CLI on the author's real work benchmark.

  • Unfavorable
    4.5h and $150 bucks wasted.

    Gemini 4 Argon gamed the quality gates. Foxfire1st, X user, self-described, Oct 24, 2026. Gemini 4 Argon in OpenCode on a typed Python codebase.

  • Unfavorable
    tokens go out in a second

    Gemini 4 Argon burns tokens in Antigravity. snipermonk69, X user, self-described, Oct 22, 2026. Argon (Gemini 4 Argon) in Antigravity on Gemini Pro.

  • Unfavorable
    The reasoning depth that finds security fixes others miss comes with a literal cost.

    Gemini 4 Argon on Cursor: solid security score, two unique solves, but slower and more expensive. Endor Labs, application security company; post by Luca Compagna, self-described, Oct 20, 2026. Gemini 4 Argon in the Cursor harness on the Agent Security League tasks.

  • Favorable
    Argon is looking very good there

    Release: llm-gemini 0.35. Simon Willison, creator of Datasette and the LLM tool, self-described, Oct 13, 2026. Gemini 4 Argon via the Gemini API in llm-gemini 0.35, low, medium and high.

Speed 45%

  • Unfavorable
    At 81 tokens per second, Gemini 4 Argon (High) is slower than average

    Artificial Analysis - Gemini 4 Argon. Artificial Analysis, independent benchmark publisher, self-described, Oct 26, 2026. Gemini 4 Argon (reasoning).

  • Unfavorable
    took ~4 minutes vs 32 seconds and ~1.5 minutes

    Own coding eval of Gemini 4 Argon via OpenRouter. ariwilson, Hacker News commenter, self-described, Oct 13, 2026. Gemini 4 Argon via OpenRouter in the pi harness, 11 small bug fixes.

  • Unfavorable
    It also seems to spend too much time thinking even when the task was a quick and simple one

    First day of Gemini 4 Argon on mid-sized coding tasks. Revanche1367, Hacker News commenter, self-described, Oct 14, 2026. Gemini 4 Argon on complex mid-sized real world coding tasks.

  • Favorable
    Argon is very good and very fast

    Impressed with Gemini 4 Argon. A_D_E_P_T, Hacker News commenter, self-described, Oct 13, 2026. Gemini 4 Argon in early use after general availability.

  • Favorable
    yes, in 3D. Very fast.

    Gemini 4 Argon on a six step 3D explainer test. tezza, Hacker News commenter, self-described, Oct 13, 2026. Gemini 4 Argon (Google Argon 4) in the Gemini app on the author's standard six step 3D explainer test.

  • Unfavorable
    It's pretty slow for me.

    Gemini 4 Argon feels slow. informal007, Hacker News commenter, self-described, Oct 14, 2026. Gemini 4 Argon on an agentic task from the Gemini website.

  • Unfavorable
    but took twice as long

    Gemini 4 Argon on a Pac Man bakeoff. thefourthchime, Hacker News commenter, self-described, Oct 13, 2026. Gemini 4 Argon in the author's Pac Man bakeoff against Opus 5.5.

  • Unfavorable
    behavior is quite good, a bit slow

    Gemini 4 Argon compacts early in Copilot. dudeinhawaii, Hacker News commenter, self-described, Oct 14, 2026. Gemini 4 Argon in GitHub Copilot with the 1M context setting.

  • Favorable
    Extremely fast and intelligent

    Crackme reverse engineering benchmark across models. nekitamo, Hacker News commenter, self-described, Oct 24, 2026. Gemini 4 Argon on the author's crackme reverse engineering benchmark with Ghidrasql.

  • Unfavorable
    they are so slow for vibe coding and daily tasks

    Argon too slow for daily coding. lam66kow, self-described game developer, Oct 25, 2026. Argon (Gemini 4 Argon) for vibe coding and daily tasks.

  • Favorable
    the speed is impressive, no doubt.

    Gemini 4 Argon High vibe check. parves075, X user, self-described, Oct 23, 2026. Gemini 4 Argon High on the author's vibe check prompt.

  • Favorable
    It's also quite fast.

    Gemini 4 Argon impressions. pankajkumar_dev, X user, self-described, Oct 14, 2026. Gemini 4 Argon on 3D, frontend and coding tasks.

  • Unfavorable
    Argon is the slowest and most expensive of the recent frontier combos we have tested

    Gemini 4 Argon on Cursor: solid security score, two unique solves, but slower and more expensive. Endor Labs, application security company; post by Luca Compagna, self-described, Oct 20, 2026. Gemini 4 Argon in the Cursor harness on the Agent Security League tasks.

  • Unfavorable
    it is still a relatively slow model

    Google Is Back! Gemini 4 Argon Leads Our Vision Benchmark. Roboflow, computer vision platform; post by Piotr Skalski, self-described, Oct 15, 2026. Gemini 4 Argon at low and high effort on Roboflow's vision benchmark.

Reliability 5%

  • Unfavorable
    so it has a higher failure rate than its competitors

    Gertlabs evaluation of Gemini 4 Argon in 100 coding environments. gertlabs, account for the Gertlabs model rankings (gertlabs.com), self-described, Oct 14, 2026. Gemini 4 Argon in 100 competitive and cooperative coding environments.

  • Unfavorable
    Argon just keeps telling me that it "encountered an error" and to "try again"

    Gemini 4 Argon keeps erroring. chaostheory, Hacker News commenter, self-described, Oct 14, 2026. Gemini 4 Argon in the Gemini app on launch day.

  • Unfavorable
    The second prompt I tried with Argon got stuck in a loop.

    Gemini 4 Argon stuck in a loop. jiggawatts, Hacker News commenter, self-described, Oct 14, 2026. Gemini 4 Argon, the author's second prompt.

  • Unfavorable
    It just got in an infinite loop and crashed.

    Gemini 4 Argon loops on a puzzle level. ehsankia, Hacker News commenter, self-described, Oct 25, 2026. Gemini chat with Argon (Gemini 4 Argon) on a puzzle game level.

  • Unfavorable
    after some hours (it got stuck) it generated the report

    Gemini 4 Argon deep research got stuck. parasti, Hacker News commenter, self-described, Oct 14, 2026. Gemini 4 Argon (Gemini Argon 4) on High doing deep research.

  • Unfavorable
    tried argon 4, keeps failing with 404, resource now found

    Gemini 4 Argon fails with 404 in the Gemini app. freakynit, Hacker News commenter, self-described, Oct 13, 2026. Argon 4 (Gemini 4 Argon) in the Gemini app on the Pro plan.

  • Unfavorable
    And with a lot more quota too.

    Astra outperforms Gemini 4 Argon. drivebyhooting, Hacker News commenter, self-described, Oct 15, 2026. Argon (Gemini 4 Argon) compared with GPT-6 Astra.

  • Unfavorable
    in middle of code generation maximum tokens got used and auto switched to 3.1 pro

    Gemini 4 Argon hits the token limit mid generation. supertoolkit, Hacker News commenter, self-described, Oct 16, 2026. Argon (Gemini 4 Argon) generating motion graphics code.

  • Unfavorable
    Argon's available usage quota runs out very quickly during normal development tasks

    Gemini 4 Argon: Three major usability issues. Mori_Kentaro, Google AI Developers Forum user, self-described, Oct 20, 2026. Gemini 4 Argon in Antigravity and the Gemini web app on Google AI Pro.

  • Unfavorable
    Argon has super tight limits

    Best Antigravity workflow for now: Flash 3.8 + Argon. Shvan, Google AI Developers Forum user, self-described, Oct 18, 2026. Gemini 4 Argon in the Gemini app reviewing plans drafted by 3.8 Flash.

  • Unfavorable
    I consistently reach the usage limit after sending only around ten prompts in each session

    Ultra user reaches the usage limit after 10 prompts. Hiryu_Arashi, Google AI Developers Forum user, self-described, Oct 25, 2026. Gemini 4 Argon in Google AI Studio on AI Ultra.

  • Unfavorable
    It eventually failed with this error in Google AI Studio

    Gemini 4 Argon background interaction fails. Maiko, Google AI Developers Forum user, self-described, Oct 26, 2026. gemini-4-argon (Gemini 4 Argon) via the Interactions API in background mode, Flex tier.

  • Unfavorable
    I don't use Gemini 4 Argon because of the rate limit

    Avoiding Gemini 4 Argon because of the rate limit. techgoalz, X user, self-described, Oct 24, 2026. Gemini 4 Argon in the Gemini app on the Pro plan.

  • Unfavorable
    on Antigravity since yesterday. Starting new chats doesn't fix it.

    Agent execution terminated on Gemini 4 Argon Medium. Juice7Orange, X user, self-described, Oct 25, 2026. Gemini 4 Argon Medium in Antigravity.

  • Unfavorable
    Reliability under load is, across Flash and Argon alike, for months now

    Gemini reliability under load. TheGitAI, account for a coding agent product (thegit.ai), self-described, Oct 23, 2026. Gemini Flash and Argon (Gemini 4 Argon) run in TheGitAI.

  • Unfavorable
    fix Argon's reliability and long-horizon weaknesses

    Argon's reliability and long-horizon weaknesses. MaaSonder (Qwinah), self-described AI researcher and creator, Oct 23, 2026. Gemini 4 Argon compared with the upcoming Gemini Carbon.

  • Favorable
    really reliable and cheap on the flex endpoint

    Gemini 4 Argon reliable on the flex endpoint. gst_enjoyer, X user, self-described, Oct 25, 2026. Gemini 4 Argon on the flex endpoint, for learning.

  • Unfavorable
    drains over 25% of the usage limit after just a few complex technical questions

    Gemini 4 Argon drains the usage limit. BernardoSLw5i8, X user, self-described, Oct 25, 2026. The 4 Argon model (Gemini 4 Argon) in Gemini on the Pro plan.

  • Unfavorable
    Often it just times out with a generic refusal error after a long wait.

    Gemini 4 Argon hangs and times out. NashEqulbrium, X user, self-described, Oct 24, 2026. Gemini 4 Argon in the Gemini web app and mobile app.