Spawn 10 on the same problem and have them debate to reach a consensus, you’ll get Fable-like results but 100x faster.

1. Their AI efforts are very fundamental research oriented. They are really good at it.

2. Their productization sucks. The end products gets little attention compared to competition. It can be canceled at any time. You should never build anything around Google only APIs, AI or not.

Otherwise, this news feels like a tiny incremental improvement on Gemini Flash series to make it more efficient with token usage, subagent and cost. Nothing big.

Regarding their benchmark scores on CyberGym, I wonder why they didn't compare their 3.5 Flash Cyber model with Fable 5. I mean they included Mythos and GPT-Cyber, so why not Fable 5 too?

They also mentioned Gemini 3.5 Pro is in testing and its about to become available very soon. Another thing maybe worth discussing is the announcement of pre-training Gemini 4. Sadly, not much technical details to discuss on. Many comments in here seem to mostly be about how Google is behind the others, but honestly, is it really worth the investment to be #1 in Artifical Analysis every week?

https://artificialanalysis.ai/models/gemini-3-6-flash?intell...

[0] https://artificialanalysis.ai/models/gemini-3-6-flash

Fable 5 still wins on detail with no visible errors, but it's close. And this isn't a memorized pelican;

https://playcode.io/blog/macbook-svg-benchmark#gemini-3-6-fl...

Rough patch for google ai

GLM 5.2 is better, also cheaper, and almost as fast.

So essentially, a big L for Google. Combine this with them not being able to produce a frontier model this generation... hmm implications