跪拜 Guibai
← All articles
Artificial Intelligence · Programmers

Gemini 4 Carbon Tops AI Index at 59 Points, Then Vaporizes: No Release Date, 11% Hallucinations

By 深蓝AI ·
Read original on juejin.cn ↗ Google Translate ↗ Alt translation

A nine-point index gain at unchanged per-token prices sets a new cost-performance ceiling that competitors must match. But with no public access, the practical impact for developers is zero until the rollout opens.

Summary

Gemini 4 Carbon scored 59 on Artificial Analysis' intelligence index v5, taking first place and four of nine sub-tests. The model's coding performance with its Antigravity CLI reached 59 points, just three behind Claude Opus 5.5's 62, the closest Google has come on that leaderboard. AA-Omniscience results show accuracy climbing to 58% while hallucination rate jumps from 4% to 11%, but rivals like Opus 5.5 and GPT-6 Astra both sit at 50%.

Per-task cost lands at $7.76, 23% below Opus and 24% above GPT-6 Astra. Carbon outputs 123k tokens per task versus Opus's 173k, a 29% reduction. Pricing stays at $4/$20 per million input/output tokens, identical to Argon, but the index score jumps nine points. Cached input costs $0.2 per million, which can halve the bill for cache-heavy workloads.

The announcement drew sharp criticism on Hacker News for its closed availability and timing. Users reported low quotas and hallucination issues in the web interface, though benchmark scores come from the API model. Until Carbon opens, the practical move is to benchmark your own workloads and measure how cache hits affect costs.

Takeaways
— Carbon scored 59 on Artificial Analysis intelligence index v5, beating Claude Opus 5.5 and GPT-6 Astra.
— It won four of nine sub-tests: HLE-Diamond, Terminal-Bench-Science, AA-Omniscience, and AutomationBench-AA.
— Coding agent index: Carbon with Antigravity CLI scored 59, Claude Code + Opus 5.5 scored 62, a 3-point gap.
— Hallucination rate on AA-Omniscience rose from 4% (Argon) to 11% (Carbon); Opus 5.5 and GPT-6 Astra both hit 50%.
— Single-task average cost: $7.76 for Carbon, $10.04 for Opus 5.5, $6.25 for GPT-6 Astra.
— Carbon outputs 123k tokens per task vs 173k for Opus, a 29% reduction.
— Official pricing: $4 per million input, $20 per million output, same as Argon; cached input $0.2 per million.
— With 1M cached tokens, per-task cost drops from about $7.66 to about $3.86.
— AA-Briefcase knowledge work: Carbon 1609 Elo vs Argon 1483; presentation +293, analysis +120.
— Kimi K3.1 Pro (1678), Muse Wonder (1659), and Grok 4.7 (1638) all rank above Carbon on the knowledge-work leaderboard.
— No public release date; only selected users have access.
Conclusions

The hallucination rate increase from 4% to 11% is a deliberate tradeoff for a more assertive model, and the benchmark shows rivals hallucinate far more, so the absolute risk remains low.

The close coding score depends heavily on the companion Antigravity CLI, meaning model and tooling are now evaluated together; a weak CLI could erase the gap.

The synchronized release timing with internal reviews and earnings suggests the announcement serves a non-developer audience, which is a trust issue that could hurt Google's adoption.

The price anchor staying unchanged while the index jumps nine points means the cost per unit of intelligence drops sharply, making it harder for competitors to justify higher prices.

Concepts & terms
Hallucination rate
The frequency with which a language model fabricates answers instead of admitting it doesn't know, typically measured on questions near the model's knowledge boundary.
AA-Omniscience
A benchmark that probes models with questions at the edge of their knowledge to measure whether they answer honestly or hallucinate.
Cached input tokens
Input tokens served from a cache at a 95% discount, which lowers costs for repeated prompts and fixed context blocks.
Source: juejin.cn ↗ Google Translate ↗ Backup ↗