Top
Best
New

Posted by acossta 5 hours ago

Gemini 4 Carbon(blog.google)
687 points | 559 commentspage 2
mattlondon 5 hours ago|
Sooo... Is Carbon 4.1? Or is it different to Argon 4 somehow? Different model? Or point update?

Is Argon "pro" and Carbon "ultra"?

Is Argon obsolete now? Does Carbon replace it or live alongside of it?

Very confusing naming!

WASDx 3 hours ago||
1. "Building on Gemini 4 Argon". 2. Same price. 3. Relatively short time between releases.

Makes me think it's further post-training of the same model.

onlyrealcuzzo 3 hours ago||
IIUC, that was all the Flash releases from 3.5 to 3.8
RajuChacha108 3 hours ago|||
For Gemini that is a foundation model version 3.1 3.5 4 etc. and there is checkpoint on evolution of those specific models. Gemini 4 had Argon - B<> - Carbon and who knows they might have Dysporsium or Europium.

Or you might get Gemini 5 Arizona.

coffeebeqn 3 hours ago||
I’m just even more confused
owkman 4 hours ago|||
Yes.. very confusing names. Carbon is the next iteration of Argon.
NickNaraghi 5 hours ago||
Carbon is like Opus

Argon is like Sonnet

qt31415926 5 hours ago|||
I'm surprised no one at Google realized that both OpenAI and Anthropic's naming schemes follow a fairly clear progression and that they should do something similar to reduce confusion. I would have assumed the opposite given that Argon has a higher periodic number
kylestanfield 4 hours ago|||
Lots of commenters here are confused by Luna, Terra, and Sol still haha.
Jtarii 4 hours ago|||
It isn't obvious that a fable is "better" than an opus either.
cubefox 4 hours ago||
Originally the model tier that was better than Opus was called Mythos, which makes sense. Fable makes no sense, since a fable is just a small story with animals. They should have used "Legend" rather than Fable.
johanyc 4 hours ago|||
That's on them imo. The point is consistency
vividfrier 4 hours ago|||
[dead]
atakanaluc 4 hours ago||||
Both seem to have the same pricing: $2 in / $10 out initially, rising to $4 in / $20 out after the introductory period. That made me wonder whether Carbon might be Argon with additional RL training. What’s the Opus/Sonnet comparison based on?
owkman 4 hours ago||||
No, it's not. The naming is just bad. It's the next iteration of Argon
hiddencost 5 hours ago||||
I don't think that's right. Carbon and Argon have the same price.

I suspect they're using a new naming convention because they had previous contractual obligations tied to the "pro" and "flash" naming, and by switching to a new naming schema they avoid those commitments.

bsiverly 5 hours ago||||
Helium will be small and squeaky I presume
luckydata 4 hours ago||||
Carbon is Fable / Astra level. Argon is their Opus / Sol.
aslilac 2 hours ago||
then why are both priced like sonnet?
fancyfredbot 2 hours ago||
They didn't pay the Nvidia tax
mattlondon 5 hours ago|||
So Argon was 4.0 Flash effectively? Interesting that there is such a small gap between their new Pro and Flash tiers
javierhonduco 5 hours ago||
Would love to know from a Googler if this is the #1 model that Google engineers use for coding or if they rely on 3rd parties.
brainwad 5 hours ago||
People I work with either use the dogfood versions of our models, the latest public versions thereof, or Opus 5.5. It's a personal preference thing, we have public usage dashboards and you can see some people are 100% Gemini, some are 100% Claude, some are using both.
ur-whale 5 hours ago||
> some people are 100% Gemini, some are 100% Claude, some are using both.

Does that mean Anthropic now has a copy of Google's source code?

[EDIT]: thanks to people in the know for their answers.

Follow-up question:

if Anthropic models run in a Google cage, does that not also mean Google can distill Anthropic models even easier (both fast and unseen)?

rfw300 5 hours ago|||
Google offers Anthropic models hosted on GCP through their Agent Platform (fka Vertex AI) - presumably any internal Anthropic use never crosses the Google boundary.
ashdksnndck 2 hours ago||||
> if Anthropic models run in a Google cage, does that not also mean Google can distill Anthropic models even easier (both fast and unseen)?

Anthropic is indeed trusting Google and other companies they rent compute from. Distilling or stealing the weights would be a contract violation, and would wreck other business relationships. I would be less worried about Google doing this, and more concerned if there is some sketchy neocloud in a van offering suspiciously low pricing.

tonfa 2 hours ago||||
> if Anthropic models run in a Google cage, does that not also mean Google can distill Anthropic models even easier (both fast and unseen)?

Not really in the interest of the cloud org to allow that, they don't really care how well deepmind is doing as long as they can sell TPU and API (incl. reselling openai and anthropic).

brainwad 5 hours ago||||
AIUI our Claude traffic runs on GCP and so never "leaves the building".
iamdelirium 5 hours ago|||
No, GCP has been selling Anthropic models for a while (and soon to be OpenAI models).
owkman 4 hours ago|||
Other comments on this already, so this is more of a confirmation.

I'm not going to comment on others use of Carbon except to say some article that came out before Argon's external launch saying Googlers hate it was nonsense. Not to say everyone loved it all the time.

I use Carbon heavily and am quite happy with it. For complex designs I may have it and Opus iterate back and forth on the design. They have their own strengths and Opus 5.5 is great, but I use Gemini far more than I do Opus at this point. I know a lot of the jagged edges of Gemini better than Opus though, so take that as you will.

yegle 5 hours ago|||
I personally use 3.8 Flash most of the time and Argon/Carbon when I need to do deep analysis or research an ambiguous problem. Opus/Fable is used when I need a second/third opinion.

3.8 Flash + /boost is very capable.

wasabi991011 3 hours ago||
What does /boost do?

And do you have advice on how best to use Gemini models? It seems like my usual strategy of iterating on plan md file -> implement based on plan doesn't seem to work, 3.8 tends to rewrite the plan too often removing crucial parts when iterating.

vinni2 5 hours ago|||
From what I heard from a Googler, Claude models are still the most popular for coding internally but it’s a couple of month old info so take it with a grain of salt.
slipshady 5 hours ago||
Googlers got access to Claude like one month ago.
mattlondon 4 hours ago||
From what I've heard they have been using it since at least Opus 4.6, if not earlier
brainwad 4 hours ago||
It was locked down to GDM only for several months, but now it's available for everyone.
eddd-ddde 4 hours ago||
Personally, any of the flash options is my default most times because it tends to perform tasks faster and with the same level of success.
Stevvo 5 hours ago||
If you don't have a general release date to announce then STFU. An undefined "coming soon" just makes people feel excluded and angry.
solarkraft 5 hours ago||
You see, I will release a really good model some day. It’ll get like 300 on AA.
dansquizsoft 25 minutes ago||
She just goes to another school!!
laimewhisps 4 hours ago||
I'd go one further, if you're not actually releasing it, then STFU. Google's working on a model? Yeah, obviously. If I can't use it today, they need to just keep their mouths shut. I'm tired of their vaporware.
quicklywilliam 1 hour ago||
Well, at least the name is honest

https://www.ft.com/content/8158cb5a-4bbd-43fd-b329-15a54e842...

alpineman 1 hour ago||
Nice try to distract from a horrible earnings release!
dbgrman 5 hours ago||
> Building on Gemini 4 Argon, which was launched two weeks ago, Carbon illustrates the pace at which we’re pushing the frontier forward. Our researchers and models are working hand in hand to advance capabilities faster, while strengthening our safeguards in tandem.

Is it a variant of Argon? A different model? The next version? It seems like this is a separate class (like Anthropic's Mythos).

anyway, its needlessly confusing.

JacobAsmuth 5 hours ago||
What are you confused about? This model is the same price and speed and token usage per task of Argon but scores better in ~every test.
pantalaimon 4 hours ago||
So why not call it Argon 4.1?
chapz 5 hours ago||
I also have no clue based on naming where this fits in, maybe it's their Claude Haiku competitor. Who knows.
Ryan5453 5 hours ago||
Of course the naming is confusing. With way OAI & Ant are naming models, I assumed that this would be a tier above Argon, but it's the same price?
flakiness 5 hours ago||
They seem to go with Android-style alphabetic order code names instead of pointed numbers (4.1, 4.2...) and drop "B" for some reason (which is creating this confusion.)
KeplerBoy 5 hours ago|||
Can't wait for Gemini 4 Darmstadtium
yegle 5 hours ago||
Dilitium would be cool.
pantalaimon 4 hours ago||||
Arrg but the period table already has a natural order, sorting elements alphabetical isn't exactly intuitive - although fitting given the parent company.
WarmWash 5 hours ago||||
Rumor is B was apparently Boron but Carbon beat it to the punch
yegle 5 hours ago|||
B was briefly an internal version
KPGv2 5 hours ago||
We all need to go back to numbered versioning. I've been on macOS and have to check every time I need to know what OS I'm running. High Sierra, Monrovia, Yosemite, who the fuck knows I've spent two days in California my entire life. I also shouldn't need to know what minor version I'm on to discuss my OS's capabilities. 26.2 is what I'm on now.
LewisOrton 5 hours ago||
tbh i might be one of the few who actually likes gemini since 3. it wasnt as good at coding compared to other two but it always wrote the best, and talked the best, providing very good conversation experience. it works incredibly well in my customer service agent harness and my users have been very satisfied. Now Gemini 4 is incredible, but the same old issue: a powerful model, in the worst official harness

deepmind should get rid of those antigravity ppl they're a joke and sabotaging the model's reputation.

5555watch 4 hours ago|
I loved Gemini 3.1 Pro and it was very sad when they nerfed it at around May this year. I think it did pretty good as a chat, and quite decent on Antigravity (tried very little). Been sitting on 5.6 / Astra and Codex since. Occasionally do bring up the 3.1 Pro through the API, because I love the writing style, but keep noticing that I'm much more productive with the frontier, despite the love to Gemini.

Tried 4 Argon, and it's very much different from 3.1, felt very much the same as any other Frontier, just without the intelligence.

sjacob 3 hours ago|||
I still use Gemini 3.1 Pro. It has been the best all rounder chat model for me.
LewisOrton 2 hours ago|||
i dont think they've nerfed it did you use api or via subscription(which might make sense) api has been pretty stable for me.

personally i like 4 Argon, it's very clever for me in a very different way comparing to the other two (especially via api) but when it comes to the google products.. sigh. nobody who's actually working on these products really cares about them in google now (maybe notebooklm is the rare exception), they're either not dogfooding themselves or somehow intentionally poisoning the experience on purpose, or simply inqualified. poor gemini is suffering in agy i can tell, it struggles so much and wont even use simple tools properly. if you put it in any good 3rd party harness out there it's flexing way better than agy and this tells a lot.

5555watch 1 hour ago||
They nerfed it heavily through the subscription, together with the UI and Pricing changes (introduced 100$ plan). Maybe it's back now, but at the time it was observable and reproducible... The API variant seems to be untouched.

What harness are you using with Argon?

LewisOrton 36 minutes ago||
If I just ask questions and do simple research without proactive local works, I'll just use the aistudio, it's probably 10x better than the Gemini app. But other than that I have my own fork based on dsh (nothing fancy I just added a few tools & fixed the thinking level param issue) I rarely use it though. Computer use is bad and i mostly use codex for that
paaloeye 4 hours ago||
I'm absolutely loving Google's new naming scheme here. Solid room for at least 118 models.
dgacmu 3 hours ago||
Not with the disrespect they've shown to Arsenic, Astatine, Barium, ...,
tiborsaas 2 hours ago|||
In case they run out elements in 2032, there's still a near infinite room by creating molecules :)
ismailmaj 4 hours ago||
they can pivot to foods: Origan, Carbonara, ....

After all they had Nano Banana for years.

paaloeye 4 hours ago|||
AI would discover and name new elements by that time. Getting humans out of the loop of the naming problem.
paaloeye 4 hours ago|||
Not sure humanity would be around after 118 models...
nickandbro 5 hours ago|
Wow, $2/$10 for input and output even if just for introductory pricing is an incredible deal. Wonder how token efficient it is.
miyuru 5 hours ago||
it says on footnote "After the introductory period expires, the price of $4 per 1M input tokens and $20 per 1M output tokens will apply."
brainwad 4 hours ago||
But if they keep releasing a model every month, then the frontier model will keep being perpetually half price?
p_l 1 hour ago||
The point of the lower pricing is to move compute (and sysadmin) capacity around
JacobAsmuth 5 hours ago||
You can check out the token usage on AA. It used ~30% fewer tokens than Opus.
More comments...