A response in that screenshot shows that argon can create something similar than opus from the same prompt, so I assume bad faith on whoever started that twitter thread because suddenly their favourite model might not be the best in every ranking.
It feels like the results in the response was given the Opus results as an input. I am basing this after looking at the title text on top left where it feels like it was trying to copy it.
Either he or whoever made that, they aren’t actually telling the truth about their prompting, or they literally rolled a nat 1 on the model’s rng. Either way, it doesn’t seem representative of typical results.
Graphics are my job, and technically these two projects are similar in complexity. I think the upper one is based on signed distance fields and it’s a really good looking very simple approach to the problem.
Using a simple springy movement on sdf based shapes(all implicit geometry) shows that opus took a better moment to figure out how to smartly approach the problem to do the minimum while making it look great. The simplified shadow is also an awesome touch that’s so simple yet so effective.
Making it mesh based(argon 4) was a mistake and the model probably started making a mess after that trying to tackle a very complicated task, whereas a human would probably scrap that idea quick and look for a better solution.
The more I think about it the more impressed I am with the top result because the model made some very human decisions to get the result, but also it was all a matter of coming up with the right idea.
Im brand new here arrived cause of Reddit algo
Is there google supporters ? And is this supposed to be impressive?
I’m confused at half the replies posts in reading here
Not /s , please really explain it to me
To be perfectly clear, it seems like Gemini’s interpretation of “Gummy” is what makes it look different to Opus, as it did have an issue with the initial rendering (the bear polygons were clearly visible). But then, it got a pretty good result!!
Do we have a map that shows which model excels in what fields?
I feel like this could be taken advantage of with the several orchestration platforms I’ve seen over the past several months. If every model is handed tasks they excel in we could take advantage of all of them in their respective fields.
It has the highest elo in writing for instance, it has the lowest hallucination rate and it's probably also very good for research as Gemini usually is
It crushed opus and fable in my work today turning a fable/opus code review of an old Perl application into a set of clear, precise reports that are actually easy for humans to read and understand.
pretty sure the SVG generation is as good as it gets, since spacial/visual understanding is where Argon outshines other foundation models....So you should get a lot out of it. This whole post is suspicious, the comments are full of people trying the prompt and getting way better results than this.
i tried SVG generatoin on a hyperframes explainer. needed papercut design, it made the ugliest thing i ever seen. GLM 5.3 was 4x better output. I gave same task to claude sonnet 5.5 free in there web ui, the result was 8x better.
I'll mess with deeper it once it is in agy form. I'm sure its great, but i would rather use a shittier model that has access to my existing directories.
Yeah, its pretty sick. I have svgs i have already made myself. I normally either have it make some small svg design to put into a bigger svg orrr have it look at some stylistic patterns in my old graphics and use them in new ones.
Programmers will genuinely mob you to death whenever you suggest vibecoding isn't the only value of a model after taking over a thread to say x or y model is worthless for the price range.
"Why did they even release haiku/gemma! I can't use this for programming, trash!" behavior.
4 benchmarks on writing, long context, and reasoning actually matter for a lot of us. Honestly, not everyone is sitting around generating React components all day, so coding scores aren't the only thing worth looking at.
I find its writing is a lot better than claude and gpt, especially in non-English. It summarized my notes and writing email really well this morning for me lol. Sentence has a lot less rigid AI prose.
Opus is legitimately painful if you try to phrase something ask it to help chatgpt too. I feel like Gemini is way better there. And just general world knowledge. Opus is obviously vastly superior on anything agentic or coding
This is literally misinformation, and anyone that has used any of these models for coding can immediately tell that the prompts used for Opus was completely different than the prompt used for Argon. Reddit truly has become the new X - just filled with trash and misinformation.
At least on Reddit, depending on the subreddit, people tend to call out B.S. in the comments. Compared to X.com which tends to be a complete misinformation chamber
while i might agree with the pricing because i dont know (i am on gemini ai ultra, $100 one, and it drains veeeery fast) i refuse to believe this AS A DOWN RIGHT HATER OF GEMINI MODELS AND FIND THEM EXTREMELY STUPID. but they are not this stupid and useless. Give the devil his due, it was never this stupid
Argon 4 applied optimizations to the game I’m working on that increased performance 30-40% while Opus 5.5 couldn’t get close to that for weeks. But the VFX and modeling I definitely leave for Opus.
Gemini 4 is very poor at 3D; it simply wasn’t RL’d on it. So I would try to measure its performance on other tasks instead.
So far I haven’t seen it failing tool calls like 3.1 did and it seems to be a persistent if quite slow troubleshooter. I hate how it “talks” long dense paragraphs.
Build "Gummy Bears" - a single self-contained HTML file (three.js from a CDN is the only dependency): a handful of translucent gummy bears on a white table that you can grab, stretch, squash, throw and pour.
The bears
- Classic gummy bear silhouette: round head with two ears, short snout, plump body, stubby arms and legs, tiny molded eyes and nose - Every part melts smoothly into the next - build the body as an implicit surface (metaballs / marching cubes), not separate spheres - Material: real gummy candy. Translucent with transmission and refraction, colored light absorption that gets deeper in thick parts, glossy clearcoat with sharp highlights - Colors: cherry red, orange, lemon yellow, apple green, clear pineapple - Soft colored shadow under each bear, tinted by the bear's own color
Physics (this is the whole point - it must feel like jelly, not plastic)
- Each bear is a soft body: mass points for head, ears, snout, body, belly, hands and feet, held together by volume-preserving shape matching
- Limbs and neck are rendered as stretchy strands between points, getting thinner as they stretch
- Grab any part and pull: it stretches like rubber, the rest of the bear leans after it, on release it snaps back with a damped wobble
- Pull the head up: the neck stretches, the body follows, on release the bear squashes and hops
- Press down on the head: the bear pancakes, bulges sideways, then launches itself back up
- Throw a bear: it flies, squashes on landing, bounces and pushes other bears out of the way
- Bears collide with each other and never pass through one another
- Idle bears do small random hops with squash and stretch
- "Pour more bears" drops a handful from above into a wobbling, jiggling pile
UI
- Editorial product-page style on a white background. Large italic serif title "Gummy / Bears.", a short subtitle, a minimal card on the right with flavor swatches, a wobble slider, live "Stretch" and "Bounces" readouts and a "Pour more bears" button
- A subtle circular cursor that grows while grabbing
- ACES tone mapping, environment reflections, soft key and back light. Smooth 60fps
Can you please share what you did to get this smooth and fantastic result? Is that just prompt, or any skill/mcp or any other thing that helped to get to this final version.
I'm too stoned rn I thought this was a paid for ad by google and was like "holy shit bold new strategy, the launch day directly into cuck chair approach will be studied for generations" lmao
It takes too long and geniunely sh*t imo. I had it trying to fix a mod crash issue in my mod list in Stalker 2. It kept mentioning mods that have requirements for example AVCR BloodFX and BloodFX mod as same mod when it is not. It doesn`t do the minimal research, just assumes as usual and takes wayyyy too long to answer. It`s way worse than 3.1 Pro I think
This reminds me of that game that used to be on addictinggames.com. I forget what's it called. It was like a grey blob dude and you would like torture him
I’m not sure if OP’s test is real but I did some comparisons with Argon vs Opus in building audio-reactive visuals with Touch Designer and they weren’t even close. Opus was on an entirely different level. It was also faster and way less expensive. I also tested with Sonnet which came super close to Opus output. I get that Argon has its strengths but for whatever reason even Sonnet absolutely crushes it in Touch Designer work.
Exactly, this is my experience as well I just canceled my subscription to google since i was using claude more and more and had to stop using gemini because of the bullshit and wild goose chases it puts you on sometimes.
Tried Argon to compare it but it just kept giving me unusable code. I also think they lobotomized gemini 3.1 pro it's absolutely unusable nowadays with the same workflows that used to work in the past are now totally unusable.
This post has so many google fans coping. Argon is a good model that competes with sonnet 5.5. It is not an opus level competitor for most tasks. The Gemini ultra plan also gives less usage than claudes $20 plan.
There is no reason to use argon for coding or graphics.
Assuming prompt were same, here Opus just behaved as if it has more experience than Argon. This I actually believe because I have seen first hand in few very niche use case how user provided data makes model smarter. Give argon some time.
Argon is not good for graphics work unless you are more specific about it. But code wise and work wise I have not complaints except the weird seperation of usage between argon and the usage I have with claude opus 5.5. I already have claude so give me just more argon usage...
Oh it sure is. I just meant that it is not his forte if you are not more explicit then usual. That is just what I discovered. I didn't meant that as a benchmark or so.
I tried Argon today and this is the first time with AI I was not able to get usable code... Argon sucks and gemini 3.1 pro is lobotomized I hope they will improve on it.
Yeah I was reading some more and Argon is apearently decent for complex tasks (mixed signals though) and claude just focusses more on professional coding I hope Google will launch a decent coding model soon too. Since I'm not getting the results with pro 3.1 that I was having before.
•
u/GeminiAI-ModTeam 17h ago
Posting a screenshot (or other) portraying some information should be accompanied with a comment explaining Contexte and or source.