Google’s Best Gemini AI Chatbot Is Now Free To Use — But There’s A Catch

Forbes - Mar 31st, 2025

Google has unexpectedly announced that its latest AI chatbot model, Gemini 2.5 Pro Experimental, is now available for free use to all Gemini users, eliminating the need for a paid Google One AI Premium subscription. Despite its free availability, the model comes with limitations for non-paying users, including rate limits and a smaller context window. This move follows the initial release to paying Google Gemini Advanced users on March 25, and has positioned the AI as a leader in benchmarks, surpassing competitors like Grok 3 Preview and ChatGPT 4.5 Preview. The powerful capabilities and improved code generation of Gemini 2.5 Pro have been highlighted as significant advancements over its predecessor, Gemini 2.0.

The decision to offer Gemini 2.5 Pro Experimental for free is seen as a strategic move by Google to increase user engagement and showcase the AI's capabilities, although some features remain exclusive to paying users. These include the ability to use Canvas for interactive document and code creation, and higher API request limits. The free version allows only five requests per minute and 25 requests per day, compared to 20 and 100, respectively, for paid accounts. This has led to some Gemini Advanced users questioning the value of their subscriptions, prompting calls for Google to clarify the differences between the free and paid versions to maintain customer satisfaction.

Google Ai Chatbot Gemini 2.5 Pro Google One Ai Premium Gemini Advanced Ai Model Capabilities Api Rate Limits Canvas Feature

Story submitted by Fairstory

RATING

7.2

Fair Story

Consider it well-founded

The article effectively reports on Google's release of Gemini 2.5 Pro Experimental, providing clear and accurate information about the model's availability and features. It is timely and relevant, addressing a topic of public interest in the AI sector. The article's clarity and logical structure make it accessible to readers, though it could benefit from more thorough explanations of technical terms. While the article is balanced in presenting both the advantages and limitations of the free model, it lacks critical perspectives from independent sources, which could enhance its depth and credibility. Overall, the article provides a solid overview of the topic, but could be improved by incorporating a wider range of viewpoints and exploring potential controversies.

Accuracy

The article accurately reports on Google's announcement of making Gemini 2.5 Pro Experimental available to all users, aligning with Google's official statements. It correctly states that the model is accessible without a subscription, but with limitations for free users. The claims about the model's capabilities and performance on benchmarks are consistent with Google's descriptions and external validations. However, the article could improve by providing more specific details about the benchmarks and comparisons with competitors. Additionally, while the rate limits for free users are mentioned, the exact figures are not directly confirmed by Google's official API documentation, which could lead to potential inaccuracies in understanding the full scope of limitations.

Balance

The article primarily presents Google's perspective, focusing on the benefits and limitations of the Gemini 2.5 Pro Experimental release. It highlights both the advantages of the free model and the incentives for upgrading to a paid subscription. However, it lacks viewpoints from independent experts or users who might offer a critical perspective on the model's performance and accessibility. Including quotes or insights from AI industry analysts or users could provide a more balanced view, addressing potential biases towards Google's promotional narrative.

Clarity

The article is well-structured and uses clear, straightforward language to convey the key points. It logically progresses from the announcement of the free model to the detailed explanation of its limitations and capabilities. The use of examples, such as the context window size and rate limits, helps clarify the distinctions between free and paid access. However, the article could benefit from more explicit definitions of technical terms like 'context window' and 'rate limits' for readers who may not be familiar with AI terminology.

Source quality

The article relies heavily on Google's announcements and statements from the official Google Gemini App account, which are credible sources for company-related information. However, it does not reference independent sources or third-party experts to corroborate claims about the model's performance or limitations. The inclusion of a Forbes contributor's opinion adds some external validation, but more diverse and authoritative sources would enhance the article's credibility and depth.

Transparency

The article provides a clear explanation of the differences between the free and paid versions of Gemini 2.5 Pro Experimental. It transparently outlines the limitations faced by free users, such as rate limits and the lack of access to certain features. However, it could improve by disclosing more about the methodology behind the performance claims and the specific benchmarks used. Additionally, the article does not discuss any potential conflicts of interest, such as Google's motivations for releasing the model for free, which could impact the impartiality of the information presented.