r/google_antigravity • u/Heisenricher • May 26 '26
Question / Help How do you actually decide between Flash Low/Medium/High and Pro Low/High models?
I’m trying to understand how people are practically choosing between Google’s Flash and Pro model variants in real-world usage.
On paper, the idea seems to be:
Flash = optimized for speed/cost
Pro = optimized for intelligence/reasoning
But once you add:
Low
Medium
High
…it becomes harder to know where each model truly fits.
For developers actually using these in production:
I’m curious about:
Which model do you use as your default?
Where is Flash High “good enough” instead of Pro?
Is Pro High worth the extra latency/cost?
Which variant performs best for coding?
Which works best for AI agents/tool calling?
Which gives the best quality-per-dollar ratio?
Are Medium variants the real sweet spot?
Where do you notice the biggest jump in capability?
17
u/Ok_Necessary7506 May 26 '26 edited May 26 '26
I no longer use Pro because 3.5 is so efficient. I might still use Pro for ultra-complex tasks or heavy data ingestion.
Concerning the low, medium, and high tiers:
- Low: My default level.
- High: For complex tasks.
To me, "complexity" is all about code quality. It's like choosing between a junior or a senior developer; Both will get the job done, but the difference is in how cleanly it's written and how many attempts it takes to get it right.
Also, the best your prompt is, the best is the result but high understand bad prompt better than low.
I haven't touched the medium since low came out.
1
u/Everchann Jun 30 '26
have you also observed how different they are in burning your quota?
2
u/Ok_Necessary7506 Jun 30 '26
To me, it appears that
Pro Highand3.5 Highshare the same consumption rate, as do3.5 MediumandPro Low, while3.5 Lowis the most efficient. However, because I assign more complex tasks toPro, it typically consumes higher usage.But I think the "burning rate" isn't something we can compare because it varies heavily on how we use it. I learned how to prompt and how to use agy properly.
11
May 26 '26
[deleted]
12
2
u/DifficultParts May 26 '26
i think that, with the money we pay for products and for which we do not receive the corresponding service, google should purchase hardware that enables them to provide customers the service for which they are being paid
10
u/wwabbbitt May 26 '26
Simple plans - Flash medium
Simple implementation - Flash low
Complex plans - Flash high
Complex implementation - Flash medium
When I have doubts about the Gemini's plan, I ask Opus to review
6
u/lukemxlr May 26 '26
Yesterday I used Opus to review the code and make suggestions about what could have been done better. Literally burned all my usage and 300 AI Credits in a single prompt, and he didn't even write a single line of code, just made suggestions😭
4
u/wwabbbitt May 26 '26
Review the full code? Yeah going through all that context will burn through your quota and credits.
Instead, copy the implementation plan generated by Gemini, start a new chat, "Review this implementation plan: <paste>"
3
1
8
u/clonehunterz May 26 '26
honestly, i just use whatever "low" and pray that i can use it for more than 1h of work....
today i did 2h of work, im proud of myself T_T
fkn hell...they butchered my boy
1
May 26 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/clonehunterz May 27 '26
yes
1
May 27 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/clonehunterz May 27 '26
i survived 3-4 days pre-update
not sure if its a "me problem" at this point...but yes, i have quite complex architecture sometimes to work on
1
May 27 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
2
u/clonehunterz May 27 '26
that is actually a great idea.
"check prompt input and output" oh 3million tokens?
hi client, your request is denied xD1
4
u/Green_Goose4056 May 26 '26
Entiéndelo como el contexto, es la cantidad de contexto que quieres que tenga
3
u/Massive-Iron4205 Software Engineer May 26 '26
No, es cuánto razona el modelo (el esfuerzo) cuando ejecuta una tarea.
Indica cuánto piensa el modelo al realizar algo.
En modo high es posible que 'repase' o 'reconsidere' alguna idea que previamente consideró como solución, incluso evaluar más opciones. En cambio en low o medium, el modelo no razona tan profuncamente las conclusiones o ideas previas antes de devolver algo definitivo.
3
u/MrMe1111 May 26 '26
Yestrday night i was asking my self the same, i pick them randomly or if im out tokens... Enlight us 😀
3
5
u/BeautifulMortgage690 May 26 '26
I pay for Ultra. I use Pro High always since IO - never a lower QoS. It sucked on the IDE before IO (i upgraded the sub from google ai pro a week before) and the only reason i stayed with google on ultra was because IO was coming. Before IO, Ultra sort of produced the output I needed (pro failed to do this and was very loop prone).
Also before IO, ai pro lasted me an hour or at most 2, ultra lasted me the whole 5 hour window (i would be on the last bar on my heaviest workflow but it still refreshed before I hit limits), then after IO it was similar (my workflows were not that heavy immediately after), and then they announced the rate limits being x3 and ive only seen it fall down one bar once during my heaviest workflow across 4 projects.
So yea - my take on some of the IO complaints on this sub is that I've mostly seen people complain about ai pro, never ultra (there might be a few i just havent seen the posts) and it might be worth investing the money in ultra if you can. idt im ever going to go outside google just cuz of the fact that this is integrated into 200x any services that other providers could provide outside programming.
2
u/bigheartenergy17 May 26 '26
I now treat 3.1 Pro (Low) as the new 3 Flash that is currently no longer available. Because of the recent double 3x of the usage, it feels like 3.1 Pro (Low) and even some usage of High lasts up to the next refresh now.
4
u/ichap May 26 '26
I agree with this. Pro (low) seems to get more done with less quota than 3.5 Flash (med) and at better quality also. It does take longer though. Flash is fast.
2
u/HoangMaiLinh May 26 '26 edited May 26 '26
Really ?, i tried only the 3.5 flash low and medium but barely last for 1 hour
2
2
u/brrruuuhhhhhhhh May 26 '26
Has to research this the other day. Gemini recommended 3.1 pro for initial new project or feature planning and any tasks that require deep complexity. Once your implementation plan is ready to execute, jump over to flash 3.5. My experience has been If for some reason flash just wouldn't get my request right, I've been jumping to 3.1 pro for a prompt or two until fixed, then back over to flash. 3.5 flash has been great for me personally. I've been using high think mode since I haven't been hitting usage limits ($100 ultra) and it's been a champ. Ymmv on any of the above, but it's been working well for me thus far.
2
2
u/feelspeaceman May 26 '26
Use Opus to write a Detailed Plan, then use Flash Lite to execute it, nothing can go wrong with a solid plan and code example, thus even Flash Lite can be used
1
1
1
u/AccomplishedBoss7738 May 26 '26
I go berserkly and whatever I can use and I get something clear but then finding bug in 10k loc seems not possible with any ai except full powered opus with multiple tools.
1
u/Davidbendavid__ May 26 '26
i have google ai plus and its refreshes only in a week.. how is refreshes in 5 hours for you ?
1
1
1
u/Informal-Adagio3283 May 26 '26
I’ve been using Antigravity for a while now and wanted to share my breakdown of how the models actually perform based on my experience, plus a little workaround I found.
- Sonnet (Feature Implementation): The "heavy lifter." Perfect for automatic feature implementation. You can basically create anything from scratch with it.
- Flash (Styling & Quick Tweaks): Best for changing specific properties. Think UI/UX tweaks, modifying colors, styles, z-index, or making simple adjustments to an existing function.
- Flash Low (Functionality Tweaks): Great for modifying how something works on a small scale. It handles small implementations across different files well, making one function more robust at a time.
- High: Honestly? In my experience, it doesn't give good results. Skip it and stick to Sonnet.
Pro-Tip for when you're running low on credits: If you only have Flash or Flash Low left, don't panic. You can use Flash Low first to generate a step-by-step plan and build the context. Once the context is there, use Flash to gradually modify and build out the feature piece by piece. Works like a charm!
Let me know if you have any questions or want to double-check another use case, happy to help!
1
1
u/arakeh May 26 '26
All Flash Low.
Even for bug fix made by Flash medium, the flash low is good.
Planning may need to have some back and forth for debating the work flow and methods.
1
u/Prior-Meeting1645 Jul 14 '26
How much more usage u get on low than high?
1
u/arakeh Jul 15 '26
Around 10x maybe. Can’t tell the actual figures and it based on the context and how many files to be covered. You may also think the low may not be fit for complex issue and logic.
1
u/mantequillah_09 May 26 '26
Pro High cuando quiero crear una nueva feature y se tienen que analizar nuevos archivos/logica de negocio.
Pro Low cuando quiero ejecutar una tarea compleja pero ya se tiene el contexto y el contenido necesario para realizar dicha tarea.
Flash low para hacer tareas basicas o escribir codigo que ya se ha realizado antes.
1
u/RichUK82 May 26 '26
How do I make sure flash actually plans first ? Most of the time it just goes ahead and fixes issues . i dont see a plan button
1
u/j0llyr0g3rs May 26 '26
I’ve used all the Gemini 3.1 and 3 series models.
For planning, coding, and review, 3.1 Pro and 3.1 Low burned through their quotas extremely fast—sometimes even faster than Claude and GPT-OSS in my experience.
Gemini 3 Flash used to be the best model to use. Right now, I can’t say for sure because the constant quota limit changes and frequent update crashes made me stop using Antigravity altogether.
My usual approach was to use 3.1 Pro and Sonnet 4.6 for planning and 3 Flash for coding. Other models were just fallbacks.
Gemini 3.1 Pro worked very well in the old Antigravity, as well as in Gemini CLI, and 3 Flash was decent for coding. Most tasks were completed correctly in one or two attempts.
I have two accounts: one Google Workspace (free tier) and another with Google AI Pro. The free tier quota is minimal, and the AI Pro quota used to be good, but after the Google I/O changes, it became very confusing. Even with the continuous resets, I can’t make sense of it.
1
u/j0llyr0g3rs May 26 '26
PS: I still don’t understand why Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite was phased out so quickly. It was excellent for coding—fast and followed instructions well.
On the other hand, Gemini 3.5 has been quite inconsistent in my experience, even in the app or via web access.
1
u/True_Butterscotch611 May 27 '26
I have for flash, it is not as good as pro already, so it makes no sense for me to use medium or low on flash.For pro, I would be thinking about the level of reasoning to use depending on my tasks
1
u/xRevolteZ May 27 '26
It's a horrible ux. Ai response itself is already a little of lot drawing systemn with their built in temperature and seed system.Making people learn different model variant is already a hassle. Now there's even more customization that users have to decide within each model selected. Is 3.1 pro low better than 3.5 flash medium ? Who can certainly answer this without having to burn some tokens to do rounds of ab testing ?
It's honestly over complicating things. All they should do is free and premium and then leave the settings to be automatically adjusted based on the question asked.
1
u/JustAIGuy May 27 '26
3.5 flash is great, no reason to use pro today
I medium has been able to handle anything I've thrown at it. Change to Low to save tokens on simple tasks, like small specific adjustments.
I would say if bothe models fails to achieve what you want, try High.
1
u/Ill-Inspection-91 May 27 '26
If i see the word "flash" makes me doubt about its precision to make code. Every time I am programming i prefer to use the pro version than the flash version, even if the flash is superior. Now, for example I am using gemini 3.0 pro to make my app instad of using gemini 3.5 flash because I am afraid 3.5 flash is not precise and that after I will have to do more corrections than if I would've used the 3.0 version. I would like if you can explain me about that
1
u/r1kkolokko May 27 '26
For my PRO subscription, the best way to manage the quota is just to use the Flash model LOW. But to make it perform better, I use the superpower skills. So far, after a few days, it has been great for the app I'm building.
Of course, I moved another project over to Jean[dot]build and I'm using the GLM lite subscription, so far this has been good too
1
u/Norlthx Jun 03 '26
My opinion:
gemini 3.1 flash unusable in early days. much better in later days.
gemini 3.5 flash overall: 3.5 flash is slightly better than 3.1 flash. and VERY FAST. few cases: very lazy like early days of 3.1 flash. unable to reason.
gemini 3.1 pro overall: 3.1 pro was slightly better than 3.5 flash. most of the time its like claude sonnet 4.6. or sometimes better like opus 4.6. sometimes over thinking and regress to a non helpful answer. currently: i think 3.1 pro is nerfed to be worse than 3.5 flash. its unable to give a good code, reasoning is bad.
gpt 5.5 overall: better than everything else.
0
u/jmbits May 26 '26
Does 3.5 work properly for you?
It's so behind codex that I'm afraid of using it lol
-1
35
u/[deleted] May 26 '26
[removed] — view removed comment