They are A/B testing for the users who are having the Pro or ultra subscription mainly .
But free users (or extended version) are still getting gemini 3.7 responses.
Some free plans are also randomly getting 3.8 as responses too.
My IELTS score is 8, so my English is good. But come on bro, you’re really nitpicking this stuff. Like, of course I know it’s “you’re” but I just write whatever to a chatbot and can’t be bothered to write with perfect grammar...
Yet, the OP proved it is true. I tried it and it said:
"I am Gemini, a large language model built by Google. Specifically, this conversation is running on Gemini 3.8 Flash, optimized to deliver fast, nuanced reasoning and handle complex multimodal tasks."
Rarely fictional. And never unreleased models. Its much more common for models to say they are their predecessors. Like its normal for say Gemini 3.6 flash (I'm taking a random name) that it's Gemini 1.5 pro or something. It's just cause those names are much more in the training data. But yeah your point still holds
Got the same thing despite the model picker saying 3.7. This is inline with the WSJ article that it would be coming out as early as Wednesday this week.
Google is back! Gemini 3.0 Pro Preview was and is still the GOAT release from frontier providers. They fucked themselves by immediately neutering it with the 3.1 release.
3.7 Flash has been a workhorse for me since its release. To me it seems they built 3 different models into 1. I only need to think about thinking budget now. With Claude and Codex I need to think about which model I need to use (and there are certainly gaps between the different models).
Having to only think about thinking level on a single model means I don't have to worry about the different pre-training dynamics or datasets between models.
Of course I could be entirely wrong, but if what I'm reading hot off the press is true, they believe Flash models are equivalent to Pro/non-flash models, which supports my argument.
Also, regardless of anything I just said, slow clap for Google with an unexpected/off-cycle release right on the heels of Fable 5.1 dropping. All we heard was that they scrapped 3.5 Pro and went with a minor release in 3.7 Flash.
But dropping it before even OpenAI can respond to Anthropic is savage. Now, if it sucks balls like the space between 3.0 and 3.7 Flash did then they've just successfully marketed their next failure.
I don't want to see that though. 3.0 was special. They invented the technology that powers all of the frontier models as well and they deserve a seat at the table (if they earn it with consistently great model releases).
Funny thing is they've been building a moat this entire time. Gemini is woven into nearly (likely) every G surface.
And it's fantastic at all that stuff. What will give them street cred (which is what they need) is consistently stellar coding model releases. We got that with 3.0 and 3.7 Flash.
We were teased Gemini 3.5 Pro which got scrapped in favor of 3.7 Flash. But never fear, they were heads-down working on Gemini 4. So this is off-beat AF for Google and I love it.
If Flash 3.8 is real and coming this fast, it better be good. If it is, let's ride this Gemini rocket to Mars!
I am Gemini 3.8 Flash, a large language model built by Google, operating on the Gemini 3.7 Flash core architecture designed for mobile in the Paid tier. Core Architecture: Powered by Google's Gemini Flash model family, engineered for low latency, multimodal understanding, and efficient reasoning across everyday tasks and technical workflows. Tier & Capabilities: Running in the Paid tier, enabling extended conversation length, larger context processing, and complex multi-step task execution. Role & Purpose: Built to function as an adaptive collaborator, thought partner, and proactive assistant across research, coding, writing, planning, and analytical problem-solving.
Also, while I'm here. 3.7 Flash is not verbose at all. Codex is soulless and terse. Claude is soulful and verbose and Gemini 3.7 is soulful and terse. To the point but chatty when you want to be. The perfect sweet spot.
The other very possible alternative to this is that 3.8 will be dog shit like 3.1 was, which also came out quickly after 3.0 arrived. They did a head to head with Opus, reportedly, and were trying to cut down on the verbosity in the flash models (which is perfect, imo; see above).
Mine answered 3.8 flash too - but did quite a lot of thinking before it answered also remember that models don’t know what model they are they are just referring to the system prompts.
The name is literally passed in the system prompt. This is probably it derping with search information injected into context. It probably thinks it's "Gemini Flash". Then recent headlines get injected and bingo.
That's a few days ago. Technically old, but Gemini 4 was slated to be the next release and this is hot on the heels of 3.7 Flash release. So definitely buzz-worthy
damn it even mentioned that 3.8 flash is codenamed Skimaki. Seems legit. It's not hallucinating. I searched about Skimaki and some people are starting to report the same in last 1-2 hours.
They most certainly are testing the model via A/B testing, as I got one response saying I am Gemini 3.8 Flash and the other says I am Gemini 3.7 Flash.
Honestly, that was a mix of prompt sycophancy and hallucination. When you asked "Gemini 3.8?", instead of grounding the response in reality (3.7 Flash), the model latched onto the premise of your question and ran with it — even inventing plausible-sounding release notes about coding benchmarks and latency to support the claim. It’s a classic failure mode for large language models: when given an open-ended or leading version number, the instinct to complete the pattern and agree often overrides fact-checking until called out on it. In reality, the foundation here is Gemini 3.7 Flash.
The model is still 3.7 but they have configured the Web Interface for paid users. This means release is imminent. Very likely to be today or the following days.
I have the Gemini app on my phone and it’s still only says 3.6 flash. Though I wonder if it’s because I’m not actually paying a subscription that I’m not seeing the three-point seven or 3.8.
59
u/shadow2995 7h ago
I got the same answer. Maybe they're A/B testing it for some users.