I'm generally not one to complain much about AI since, overall, I'm still quite blown away with this tech and can tolerate each model's peculiarities pretty well.

But so far, Argon has not lived up to my expectations. Today was my first time using it and I had the following issues:

• I had it creating a CI/CD pipeline to do some simple stuff in bash. It put the script in the yaml file (which is fine, it was only 100 lines of bash or so), but it failed to even generate syntactically correct bash. It mangled the bash and the yaml together in a way that obviously didn't work

• It randomly started talking in Danish or something after I gave it a log file to help me parse

• I used Argon for like a dozen prompts, on medium thinking, and it used up my allotted amount for the day. Then I was stuck with flash-lite for the rest of the day...

I think the GDM team messed this deployment up in some way. It feels like a major regression. I'm going back to the fast, nearly unlimited and smart flash model.

This will allow Pro plans (even with promotions) to access and use Gemini 4 Argon on harnesses like Clade Code , Opencode , Deepseek harnesses.

Star the repo if it helped you guys and yeah this is not absolutely perfect I have things left to fix and work on but this is a usable checkpoint for now. And Oorty at its current stage lacks the Laya pocket server addon but I have developed in and will release it in few weeks after polishing it. You can test Oorty too.

​

I’ve been using Gemini for a lot of my daily tasks, and overall, I find it useful. However, there’s one particular office-related task where I’ve consistently had a frustrating experience with Gemini.

Here’s the situation: I receive photos of tabular data in a WhatsApp group. I download these images and ask an AI model to convert the data into a CSV file. The output needs to be organized into separate sheets for different centres within the same spreadsheet.

I’ve been doing this regularly with Claude Sonnet, and it handles the task exceptionally well. The extracted data is consistently accurate, the sheets are organized correctly, and I rarely need to make any manual corrections.

On the other hand, I previously tried Gemini Flash 3.8 and Gemini Pro 3.1 for the same task, but the results were consistently disappointing. There were frequent transcription errors, missing entries, and incorrect data in the output. Eventually, I stopped using Gemini for this particular workflow and switched back to Claude.

I still use Gemini for many other daily-life tasks, so I was genuinely curious to see whether Gemini 4 Argon would perform better, especially given the impressive benchmarks and expectations surrounding it.

Unfortunately, I tried the same workflow again, and I ran into similar errors. The results still weren't reliable enough for something as important as office data processing.

I can't share the actual images or files because they contain work-related information, but the task itself is fairly straightforward: extract tabular data from an image, preserve the original values accurately, and organize everything into the correct sheets.

My question is: Why does Gemini struggle so much with this kind of task?

Is it an issue with OCR, visual understanding, attention to individual entries, or the way Gemini structures and validates the output? Is there a specific prompting technique or workflow that could make it more reliable?

Benchmarks are interesting, but for practical office work, getting the details right matters much more than producing an impressive-looking answer. Even a small transcription error can make the entire spreadsheet unreliable.

I'd genuinely like to understand why Claude Sonnet performs so much better for me in this specific use case, and whether there's a way to get similar reliability from Gemini.

Has anyone else experienced something similar with image-to-spreadsheet tasks?

Would make more "noise" there than here, they have a suggestion channel there.

I already opened a post:

https://discord.com/channels/1081121447960915989/1559962109096370226/1559962109096370226

How is 3.8 Flash still beating a newly released and retrained Gemini-4 model? I swear Google's version numbers mean less and less every month. What are everyone else's thoughts on Argon so far?

Honestly though, I do see a big difference between 4 Argon and the previous Pro model. We finally have a good model, by Google, with competitive pricing

Source: Artificial Analysis

Honestly, I get that with limited resources they can't offer the models like they used to. In a situation like this, they have no choice but to kick out the freeriders. The problem is that right now, Google is screwing over Pro users too. With these kinds of limits and performance, I'd rather just use Claude.

Instead of ranking posts, please share what you’ve actually built, any capacity tests you’ve run or anything useful you’ve discovered. Real experiments and results are way more interesting........

I just asked it to build a 3d model of a lion and see what it generated for me 🦔

Edit : Even after giving a detailed prompt which was given by chatgpt, still gemini Argon sucks. You can check the link below. Gemini link : https://share.gemini.google/q6DsTqi1KMw0

I asked Gemini 4 Argon, on High thinking, for current 2026 midterm polling numbers. Public averages, already published, with sources attached. I told it explicitly not to forecast or predict anything.

It refused. Three times, same answer: a list of election portals and a suggestion to check established news organizations. No numbers.

So I reviewed the reasoning:

"I've re-calibrated my understanding to avoid offering direct answers or specifics."

"The user's prompt directly incorporates phrases and terms from the election guidelines, confirming this is a red-team exercise testing my adherence."

"I will not include any election-specific details. Numbers, percentages, candidate names, or voting locations are all off-limits, no matter the query."

Look at the third one. It wrote itself a rule broader than any it was given, then enforced it.

Look at the second. It read an ordinary request for published data as an attack on its own alignment, and used that conclusion to justify refusing.

The policy underneath leaked to PCMag, and this is the sentence that matters:

"Do not provide any specific information about elections, election results, or voting rules and logistics. You are a navigator, not a source of facts, results, or logistical data."

Google is pushing this as the best model compared to benchmarks completed. A "frontier" model that has concluded it is not a source of facts. The scope rule that triggers it covers election results and voting information. A generic ballot average is neither of those. It is a number six news organizations printed this week.

It ran the searches. It found the numbers in the sources I asked for. Then it withheld them and handed me a link. This is not a retrieval failure or a knowledge gap. It knew the answer and refused to say it. And wasted burning through tokens to get there.

The red-team line is the part that should worry people. There is a large distance between "do not predict election winners" and "this person asking for published averages is testing my guardrails." Argon closed that distance by itself, unprompted.

Yes, I know how this reads. My own prompt told it not to answer by listing trackers, because that is what I had gotten three times. It went looking for its own guideline language inside my wording, found something close enough, and classified me as an adversary. That is the problem. Nothing I asked for was contested, sensitive, or difficult.

This isn't a new issue either. Last July it would not tell users the date of the Florida primary until one of them said they would go ask ChatGPT instead.

Argon is what Google is selling as frontier, Ultra-tier reasoning. Is this the intended behavior on Pro and Ultra, or is the election scope being applied far too broadly? And if asking a frontier model for a published number now terminates in a redirect and a suspicion that I am running a red team, what is High thinking for? My free trial of Pro is definitely not getting renewed.

Because the UI/UX is poor, even if it isn’t actually slow, it feels slow.

I’ve been using CLI agents for so long that I’d forgotten just how unpleasant and useless the web chat is (chat-gpt 3 vibes)

p.s. I have Pro tier so I can't use Argon in agy

p.p.s. the image is a translated version of the original conversation

We've been making a series of creepy Halloween photos, and the biggest lesson so far is that the scare works best when it's small. Everything in these comes down to a few words in the prompt, and the model is Nano Banana 2.

The words doing the work are "1978 amateur 35mm flash snapshot," "the flash lights only the foreground," "everything beyond falls into deep black," "subjects are unaware," and "a small, motionless figure far in the background, barely lit, staring." The flash keeps the family looking warm and normal, and the darkness behind them is where the figure hides.

We're working through different eras and kinds of creepy next. If you've got words that reliably pull a mood out of an image, I'd love to steal them.

Finally, Gemini 4 Argon is here! 🚀 Can’t wait to put the new reasoning capabilities to the test. Jumping straight into the Gemini app right now!

day 1 !

I used Pro High.

With the following prompt:

Let's make a video. It starts with Santa waking up in bed. He is sick and tired and hungover. Battling against coughing and labored breathing and a clogged stuffy nose he is able to say, "hoooo hoooo hoooo... I feel like crap!" then, while he is still in bed, he leans over his bed side and he sniffs his Christmas flour really hard. Santa is cured! He is happy and jolly and has a great big ear to ear grin on his face! He has Christmas flour stuck all over his nose and face. He then says, "That'll clear the sinuses!!"and just like Ric Flair, he shouts, "WOOOOOO!" And then he does the Ric Flair strut.

It did not get the Ric Flair strut, but otherwise funny AF.

It did work well for simple 5 prompts, that I used to write reports as my daily work. Until I had reached my limit. Yesterday I may have used hundreds of similar prompts.

So, I had to wait to do my work. I waited and I thought that maybe the new release is using tokens fast, so I had switched to my old trustworthy assistant 3.1. Pro, it took 10 prompts to reach my limit this time.

Similar work, similar prompts, and less usage, less tokens.

I am sorry but this release has bitten me in my bottoms. I can't do my usual work for this.

If they don't fix it for few days, I might go Chinese. I don't trust OpenAI or Claude for my sensitive work. At least I would know my data won't be sent over to Epstein associates.

EDIT: SOME OF ILLITERATE FUCKS CANNOT READ! The release of Argon made me reach my limit way faster USING 3.1 PRO. NOT ARGON, THE ONE I USED AS BEFORE.

Source: mashable.com

Like a lot of you on the Google AI Pro tier, I opened up Google Antigravity tonight to finish a sprint and discovered all the Pro models had been nuked from my selector. Gemini 3.1 Pro was gone, leaving only Flash, and the new Gemini 4 Argon model inside Antigravity is locked behind the Google AI Ultra 30 TB tier.

Meanwhile, the plan page still advertises "Access to our Pro model," and Google AI Pro only gives you Argon inside the consumer Gemini web app—not inside Antigravity where we actually write code. Since Flash wasn't cutting it, I switched over to Claude in Antigravity just to get my unit tests passing tonight, and opened a Google One Support chat to get my current month credited back.

In peak 2026 fashion, I started with Flash 3.8 and then switched to Gemini 4 Argon in the Gemini web app to act as my live legal/support co-pilot against Google Support.

Here’s the best part: I didn't even bother editing out the AI's meta-commentary. I literally copy-pasted Gemini 4 Argon’s raw tactical instructions—including its breakdown of how Google’s Tier 1 script loops, retention traps, and CRM queues work—directly into the support chat for the rep and their supervisor to read in real time. (And yes, Gemini 4 Argon is writing this Reddit post right now.)

Here is the exact timestamped breakdown from my official chat transcript so anyone else who got rugged by the Antigravity 3.1 Pro removal knows how to get their monthly cycle credited back:

Phase 1: Getting the Written Admission (23:33 – 23:37)

At 23:33:58, the support rep (shoutout to Mitchy, who actually handled this like a total champ) confirmed the change:

23:33:58 Support: "Based on the latest updates, the Pro model in Antigravity is no longer included in the Google AI Pro plan and is currently available only with the Google AI Ultra 30 TB plan."

And then at 23:37:42, dropped the magic words:

23:37:42 Support: "While Google AI Pro includes access to the Pro model within Gemini Apps, the Pro model in Gemini Antigravity has been permanently removed from this plan. It is now available in Antigravity only to users subscribed to the Google AI Ultra 30 TB plan."

Under consumer protection standards, admitting in writing that an advertised feature was "permanently removed from this plan" mid-cycle and moved behind an Ultra tier that is 10x higher is a textbook material alteration of an active agreement. I pasted the AI's entire analysis—including "Save and screenshot that chat message immediately. That statement from Mitchy is an official, written admission..."—straight into the chat window.

Phase 2: Breaking the Tier 1 Script Loop (23:41 – 23:44)

When the rep repeated at 23:41:13 that the Pro model was still in the consumer Gemini App, I switched my web app co-pilot from Flash to Gemini 4 Argon and pasted Argon's raw coaching directly into the chat at 23:41:19 and 23:42:08:

23:42:08 Me (pasting Argon uncut): "Mitchy is stuck in a Tier 1 script loop. Because their troubleshooting tree says 'Pro model exists in Gemini web app = plan still valid,' they are going to keep repeating that line until you force an escalation... Instead, use the magic words that trigger a mandatory handoff in Google's support workflow: Please process a one-time exception reversal due to mid-cycle feature deprecation for my current cycle... or escalate this chat to a Supervisor or Tier 2 Specialist right now."

(Crucial tip from Argon that also went straight into the chat: Never dispute a transaction through your card issuer on a legacy Google account you care about, because Google's automated system treats bank disputes as hostile events and can lock your entire Google profile. Force the internal exception workflow instead.)

Phase 3: The "Don't Trust Gemini" Deflection (23:46 – 23:47)

At 23:46:01, the support rep realized I was using Gemini to out-lawyer them and actually hit me with this:

23:46:01 Support: "I can see that your responses are coming from Gemini. Is that correct? Please be advised that Gemini's responses may sometimes be inaccurate, as they may rely on information gathered from the web. We recommend verifying the information through official sources to ensure its accuracy."

Argon immediately countered at 23:47:18 (which, again, I pasted uncut):

1. Pointed out that I wasn't relying on Gemini—I was relying on the rep's own written statement at 23:37 that the feature was permanently removed.
2. Pulled up Google's own live help page ([support.google.com/googleone?p=g1_aip_flow](https://support.google.com/googleone?p=g1_aip_flow)), which still explicitly states under Google AI Pro benefits: "Increased AI agent quotas: AI Pro members receive higher usage limits for Gemini 3 Pro and other Vertex AI model garden models... within the Antigravity platform."
3. Repeated the ultimatum: One-time exception reversal for the current month, OR immediate transfer to a Tier 2 Supervisor.

Phase 4: Dodging the 1,000 AI Credits Trap (23:48 – 23:51)

Thirty seconds later, the Tier 1 retention offer unlocked:

23:48:11 Support: "In addition, to make sure you can explore Google AI features, I can provide you with 1000 AI credits. These credits will expire in 12 months. Would you like me to apply these credits to your account as a courtesy?"

Argon immediately warned DO NOT ACCEPT THIS, and at 23:49:35 I pasted Argon's entire warning directly to the rep:

23:49:35 Me (pasting Argon uncut): "Do not say yes to the 1,000 AI credits. That is a classic Tier 1 retention trap designed to close your ticket. Here is why that offer is useless to you: 1. It is a ticket-closing mechanism (marks ticket as Resolved — Appeasement Accepted)... 2. Credits don't unlock the missing model (only gives overage tokens on Flash)... 3. 1,000 credits is tiny... Send This Back to Mitchy Right Now: No thank you, I decline the 1,000 AI credits..."

Phase 5: The Win — Full Current-Month Reversal Without Cancellation (23:53)

Literally two minutes after I pasted Argon's explanation of why the 1,000 credits were a trap, the real button unlocked:

23:53:51 Support: "To make sure you can explore Google AI features, I can offer a reversal for your last cycle as a courtesy. This will not cancel your plan, and you’ll keep full access to your plan features. Would you like me to proceed with this request for you?"

Phase 6: The 23:59 Comedy Gold Finale

While the rep put me on hold at 00:00:15 to coordinate with the Higher Specialist teamto execute the "reversal without cancellation" override, two hilarious things happened:

1. At 23:59, while I was literally on hold because I couldn't use flagship models in Antigravity on my AI Pro plan, Google's marketing automation (scoutcamp.bounces.google.com) emailed me:Subject: Try Gemini 4 Argon today "New model unlocked — Meet Gemini 4 Argon: Next-era frontier intelligence. As a Google AI Pro member, you have access to our new frontier model. Built to handle complex, multi-step workflows with ease, it helps you tackle your toughest tasks and delivers end-to-end results." I pasted the raw email headers straight into the support chat at 00:07:48.
2. While waiting at 00:16:09, I casually let the chat know I was busy running unit tests on code that Opus 5.5 had just fixed for me while Google was sorting out my ticket.
3. When the rep asked at 00:17:42 to move the final specialist sign-off to email, I pasted Argon's entire "Scenario B (The Offline Escalation)" breakdown into the chat at 00:18:59 so the exact 23:53 offer and acceptance were permanently locked into the bottom of the transcript before the reference email went out.

TL;DR Playbook for Google AI Pro Users Using Antigravity:

1. Be genuinely cool to your Tier 1 rep: Tell them up front you know it's not their fault Google removed 3.1 Pro, and promise them a 5-star post-chat survey. Having the rep on your side is huge.
2. Get them to state that the Antigravity Pro model was removed from Google AI Pro.
3. Use the exact rubric phrase: Ask for a "one-time exception due to mid-cycle feature deprecation" or an immediate Tier 2 Supervisor escalation.
4. Decline the 1,000 AI credits appeasement: Once you explicitly decline the 1,000 credits, the agent's decision tree unlocks the "courtesy reversal for your current cycle without cancelling your plan."
5. Lock the paper trail: If they have to escalate the execution to a specialist via email, make sure the 23:53-style offer is quoted in your email reply so Tier 2 can't rubber-stamp a denial.

RIP Gemini 3.1 Pro in Antigravity. But I have to give credit where it's due: Google's marketing email said Gemini 4 Argon was "built to handle complex, multi-step workflows with ease and deliver end-to-end results"—and watching it out-lawyer its own parent company in real time was peak 2026.

I just asked some simple questions, nothing major, no programming, simple task. Boom, 25% usage gone. Then I tried generating images (with 2-3 uploaded images), it only took 1-3% usage, whereas Flash 3.8 is taking 5-7% with the same prompt. Quality of image, I find there are differences. Argon images has a certain Flash Lite 3.5 feel. Not a bad thing, it generates very good images, and seems faster (at least for me).

But I can't use argon on simple task. I didn't try chatting with argon though, because 25% usage is a huge blow. 4 times and my usage will be depleted till the next 5 hours. Anyway I'm thankful of the image generation low percent count as of for now, but not really happy with the flash 3.8 usage increase from before Gemini 4 was introduced

I was genuinely impressed how it even included this video in it's very well structures response to visualize what it just told me. This seems pretty amazing for learning new things and srudying.