In this video, I want to do a comprehensive head-to-head test comparing GPT-3.5, which just came out and it beats GPT-4.0 in their benchmark testing. But I don't want to do a scientific test like they do in their benchmarks. I want to do a practical test - how we use these AI models every day for work and business. So then we could actually figure out which one is the most practical model that we use if we had to pick one. Which one is the right one to pick. So that's typically how I do these tests with very practical applications. So I'm going to cover about 10 different things and we're going to use things like writing text, summarizing text, and then we'll get into vision and data analytics. And then we'll do some coding and reasoning too at the end. So both GPT-4.0 that I'm going to use and the Claude 3.5 that I'm going to use are going to be the paid version.

but both of those are available completely for free. They are extremely limited in how much you could use them right now. So, I was using CLA 3.5 sonnet, and I only got about 10 messages before I ran out. So, I had to upgrade and get the subscription to do a real head-to-head test. First, let's start with a writing prompt. A lot of us use these models to write all kinds of different things, right? So, this one is going to be a little bit of creative writing in the world of marketing. You're launching a game-changing software tool revolutionizing customer relationship management for business. Write a short, punchy product description. And I told it exactly how many words in this case, and I'll do the same thing for Cloud 3.5. Here, here's the result from Chat GPT. It went right to the answer: Introducing Customer Connect, the ultimate CRM tool that transforms customer interactions. Pretty good. I asked how many words it was. 41. Our instruction is 50 words approximately. Now, Cloud gave us a little

bit of a longer one. It's 54 words here, but again, I said approximately, and he's asking me if I wanted to adjust it. This one named it Autoc CRM revolutionize your customer relationship. Our AI-powered platform automized follow-ups, delivers real-time insights, and boost retention effortlessly. Okay, so they both did a good job. Nothing here that screams that an AI wrote it. And I typically use these models to help with writing email drafts. So, write an email introducing this to our email list and keep it short. Let's see what it comes up with. Now, here we got Claude's answer, and this time again, it does the same thing. It gives us that sentence that we don't need that's not part of our email, and it kind of gives you a quick recap of what it's done. And then you'll have to kind of copy and paste the middle part here where Chat GPT just gives us the copy option. Right here, I could just copy this. There's no extra words. So, I personally prefer to have zero extra words when I

ask something in a prompt. I just want the answer. I don't want it to kind of explain it to me. If I need it to explain to me, I would ask it to explain it to me. And I found ChatGPT. Typically, every time I give it tasks where it has to give me an answer that I could just copy and paste, it just does exactly that. And as I'm reading the tone of this email here, they both again kind of did an equal job. This one is a little bit overly excited, so it's a little bit sounds too promotional, uses words like boost, which is very common with AI. And if I go to ChatGPT again, the exact same thing happens. There's boost. I commonly see that. And I erased my memory here on ChatGPT because I've actually trained it in the memory function, which I've made a different video about, not to use specific words. But since Claude doesn't have memory, I excluded that. And I just cleared down my memory here. So it just writes like it would without any

kind of backend instructions here. And when it comes to writing, I ran it across 10 different tests, and there was not a clear-cut winner. I think if I was comparing Claw 3.5 versus the previous GPT model, it would have been a clear winner. But with 40 and Claw 3.5 Sonet right now, I think when it comes to writing, it's pretty on par. Now, next I want to show you text summary. And a lot of times I consume information now using these models. When there's a large amount of information or a huge article or a big newsletter, I usually just put it here, and I let it just summarize it for me very quickly. So let's do that here. Okay, here's the prompt: Provide two summaries for this article. The first one two to three sentences, the second one five to six sentences and includes more details. And I'm going to use this anthropic introduction here about Sonet. So I'm going to go ahead and copy this whole page, and I'll just paste it here. I typically just copy the entire

page with the footer and everything, and he knows what to do with it. It's a much faster way to do this. I'll send this out here, and this time let me just kind of show you the speed because this 3.5 sonit is actually pretty quick. So he paid attention to the length, he got it right. I read through this, and everything was accurate. There was no kind of hallucination with this answer, everything was exactly from that article. Okay, here's chat GPT's answer, the short summary again, right on point. The detailed summary, I really like the tone, it was not at all emotional, very factual, kind of how I like it without much detail prompting. I didn't really tell it what kind of tone to take, wanted to see what it does by default. And one functional thing I like here, GPT actually, if you have the paid version, you could use GPT 4 and actually get a different response using a different model and compare your results inside of cloud. If I try to do the same thing with a paid version, I

could TR change models and use Opus, for example, but then that's going to require me to start a new chat. So I can't functionally use it the same way. Not that I would do that often, but sometimes I find myself not quite liking what 40 gave me, and I wanted to see what the older four model, which was good, which is good still. I wanted to see what that gave me, something I could do in chat GPT. Okay, now let's test its Vision capabilities. Then I'll test its Vision capabilities with some data analytics. But here I want to see if you could find out what's in a very complex image. This is as weird of an image I could find. This is world history in one image, that's what I Googled. And just looking at it, you can't tell, you can't make out just about anything that's happening. Maybe some of the years here you could make out, but nothing else. Let's see if Claude and CH PT could figure it out. So again with these models, you could

upload images here with Claude you could upload five, and each has to be 10 megabytes. With chat GPT, you could upload 10 here. So, that is one of the benefits, and it has connected apps. So, you could actually connect to your OneDrive with Microsoft. Or mine is connected to my Google Drive, which makes this a whole lot more useful when it just comes to these functionalities. CLA is really lacking when it comes to just basic functionalities. I'll point out a bunch of them too as we go through this video, but let me upload that image. And I'm just going to press Enter. I'm not even going to give it a prompt here. This is Chat GPT 40. Okay. And from what I could see, it found the name for it: Stream of Time: A Timeline Map, the Rise and Fall of Different Civilizations, Empires, and Nations. And it says it's from 250 AD to 1700 AD. And I'm going to say, analyze this image and explain this to me. So, sometimes just changing something and giving it in a different format, bullet.

point table. I use that all the time, okay, and it's giving us a really nice presentation here in table format. So it looks like it's putting the different country civilizations here and showing the time period where they were around, the key events, and so on, and summary, okay, really nice answer here that we got out of chat GPT, assuming is correct. Let's go to CLA and do the same thing, okay? Again, I'll just press enter to start with no prompt, okay? So it got the same theme, it picked up on some of the colors, and it's telling us it's from 580 to 1180. Let's make that same table here, and this one is using this thing called artifacts, which is something you could turn on in settings. It's completely beta right now, but it kind of creates things on the right side, and it's great for coding and visual presentations like tables like this. So I really like this new update. I covered this in a different video that I posted about CLA 3.5, and it created kind of a different table.

it just gave us the elements and the description for these elements, and Chat GPT gave us something completely different. So this looks more usable, but when I'm looking at this, it actually got the time wrong. I did a little bit closer look at this image. If you look a little bit closer on the very bottom, it does end at the Timeline ends at 1100 AD. So Claude was correct. He got the information right. So I'm just going to follow up here to ask for the similar table that Chat GPT gave me. I'm going to ask it for a timeline with each civilization and the rise and fall. Okay, and this time it looks like it did a better job. And just to be sure, I ran this three different times, and each time I got a very similar result here. So basically, Chat GPT gave us something that looks better, right? So at first glance, this looks more interesting, and it looks like it gave us better information, but it totally made up the time. That graph started from 500 to 1100.

this did not give us anything that is in that time frame. It kind of extended the time frame here, so I wouldn't take any of this information at face value. These are some of the limitations of these large language models in general. You can't just look at the output and just assume it's right. So, sometimes it even makes sense to have two different subscriptions if you're doing Vision capabilities of data analytics, to just run them and then using your own judgment to see actually which one makes sense. I had to really take a close look at this picture to kind of try to figure it out, and this was one of the more complex things that I've given these large language models to analyze. But I could tell Claude 3.5 right now is winning. Here's kind of a challenging graph to see what it comes up with, so I'm giving it this graph, but I cropped out what this graph represents. But what it is, is the interest rate for used card in the US. Here so I'm going to

see what it comes up with. Okay, here's chat GPT-3 telling us this is a Trends graph from 2014 to 2024. It is stable all the way till the pandemic, then it has a dip, which is telling us right here. It has a 3% or it dips below 3%, which is right. So, it was all the way around four, dip to closer to three, and then significant increase, which is accurate. Let's see if you could actually figure out what this represents, and he thinks it represents the federal funds rate, which again, they do set the interest rates. So, pretty close, but I didn't really think it would figure out that this is for the car market in the US in this time frame. But I was curious to see if it's going to do any type of research. It's going to look online, but it came up with two different conclusions here: federal funds rate or Central Bank policy, which is not correct. Let's go see what Claude did, but that was not my test, by the way. I just wanted

to see if it did that extra step right now. I want to see if it could just analyze things, pull in the numbers, and then use those numbers to do deeper analysis. And it looks like Claud, again no problems here. It gave us the range, it told us the range of the interest rate here, and it told us exactly how it's changing over time. And this time I also asked it what this graph represented, and it gave us five different options. None of them were very specific to what I was going for, but generally it's all about the interest rate here, and it kind of figured that out, but it wasn't specific enough to use car market in the US and the interest rate on that. Now I'm going to follow up with chat GPT. I'm going to say, Create a presentation based on this information. Now it's going to go through here, create these kind of slides for us. So it's giving us titles for the slides, then it's telling us, Would you like to create a PowerPoint file created with.

this contents let's say yes okay it's done and gave us a link. Let me go ahead and download this link to see what it gave us. Okay, it looks like it gave us a detailed PowerPoint here. It does need some styling. It typically doesn't do the styling here, but PowerPoint has this AI, this designer AI where you could just go ahead and select different designs here from the side and get yourself a finished presentation. So nice job with chat GPT. And I asked Claude to create a visual presentation and look what Claude did here. This is with the artifacts option turned on. Again, you could turn that on in the settings, but it wrote some code and then it creates this preview window and it created this nice visual graph. I mean, this is kind of the same as our current graph. Let me see if it could make us a PowerPoint presentation. But this is really cool right inside of your viewport here. Let me see if it could create a PowerPoint presentation here. Okay, it's doing the same kind of thing. It's creating the

slides or the text here for the different slides, and what bullet point should go in each one. And it looks like it cannot do that, so I can't create or edit or provide download links to PowerPoints directly. So all it was able to do is kind of write code and create this nice visual presentation for us right within chat. But in this case, I did want a PowerPoint presentation. Now, that's one of the big limitations of cloud. There's a lot of functionalities like this one was a really useful practical thing, right? I want to give it some data just from an image, get the context from that, and turn it into a presentation. Chat GPT could do that in one minute, right? And we could then use PowerPoint to design it using the AI inside of that. Cloud can't do that, so it could only do things like these visual representations. And again, I ran this through a bunch of different tests, and I think with data analytics so far in my early testing, they were pretty equal. So functionality goes to chat GPT, but in

the function of data analytics. They both are about the same right now. Now at this point, I usually do a head-to-head test with image generation, but the only way you get image generation right now is using ChatGPT with a paid subscription. And that gives you access to DALL-E 3 that generates images for you. Claude cannot and never has been able to generate images, so I can't compare that. So that obviously is a point for ChatGPT. So if you need image generation in your day-to-day work, you'll have to use another tool like Co-Pilot's free, and that has DALL-E 3 built into it. But you can't just use Claude because that doesn't have image generation at all. So if that's part of your workflow, keep that in mind. Now let's do a little bit of research here. I'm going to ask ChatGPT to write about AI's disruption in the accounting industry and give me specific links and articles and reports. And here you gave us some information. I'm going to go to the bottom of it to make sure.

he's giving us some relevant links here, and for some reason, the links are not clickable. So sometimes it makes up links, sometimes it gives us links that look like hyperlinks, but when you go to click them, they're not clickable. I'm going to tell it they're not clickable. I asked it to give me the links again, and I still couldn't click them. The third time I couldn't click them, so I asked them to give me the links like this so I could copy and paste the links. Let's see. Nope, made a page there. Let's try this one. Cannot find this page. Okay, so a lot of times, chant GPT when you use it for research when you need specific information from specific websites and resources like this, it just does not work. It literally makes up links like you're seeing here. This has happened to me probably every other time that I've used chat GPT for research. Okay, on the other hand, let's look at Claude. So Claude did again a nice job, gave us specific use cases of things that could

be interrupted by AI potential challenges. If I go to the bottom here, I don't have access to current articles or reports. Okay, so keep this in mind. Claude does not have internet access. It never has had internet access, whereas GPT-3.0 has internet access. Sometimes it makes huge mistakes like you just saw, but sometimes it works. So in this case, it doesn't work at all. Chat GPT could follow URLs. A lot of times, I'm optimizing my website, for example. I give it a URL, it crawls the website, it tells me things to improve. I can't do things like that here for research. I would not use any of these tools. I wouldn't use Claude, I wouldn't use Chat GPT. I would use Perplexity AI. So, that is a great research tool. It uses the power of these models in the background, but it's really designed to be a search engine that's AI-powered. I have a different video about that. Or I'll use Google Gemini and let Google Gemini give me a snippet.

know that is kind of pulling from more accurate listings based on the Google search right. So, both of these, in my opinion, get a zero. Okay, now let's do some coding. I'm going to see if I can make a dashboard with these models. We're going to go to the Nvidia website here, and I'm going to pull in one of their financial reports here. So, this is a massive, massive document. I believe it's 98 pages. Let's download this. Okay, I'm going to ask Claude. I uploaded this document. Turn this into a visual dashboard here to see what we get. And usually, if you have that artifacts option turned on, it starts writing the code right here on the side. And as soon as it's done, it turns into preview mode where you could actually see the output, which is awesome. This is one of my favorite updates. Look at this. It created this visual update for me, and it's interactive, so I could hover over things. Wow, this is nice. All right, let's see if ChatGPT could do the same now. The nice

thing by the way is both GPT 40 and Claw 3.5 Signet. Now they have such a big context window that I could just use a 98-page document as part of my prompt and upload that. Okay, so chat GPT just gave us a bunch of information from that document, so it pulled in a bunch of different numbers and things like that. It did not create the visual presentation. It's asking me if I want to proceed. I'll say yes. And again, it looks like it gave us a ridiculously long step-by-step process on how to use this other app to do this outside of chat GPT. It's not even attempting to write. Oh, it's still going. It's not even attempting to write any code for us. Again, I went back and forth three different times with chat GPT to try to just get it to do this. Before, it used to create interactive, and I think it still does, but for some reason in the last couple of days, I haven't got it to do

any type of coding or create any type of interactive graphs here when I give a very specific instructions to do so. Okay, so when it comes to visualization of data using Code, well, Cloud is obviously the winner there. Now let's see if we could create a game. This time I'm going to create a game of checkers. I typically do a game of snake or Tic Tac Toe. Let's see if he could do a game of checkers without again any information about what kind of language to use. In just 10 seconds, he wrote the code, and he gave us the preview. Now let's see if it actually works. It says current player red. Let's go ahead and try to move our piece from here to here, black from here to here, and I'll take this piece. Nope, oh, he almost worked, but it doesn't quite know how to take a piece. I asked CHPT to create a game of checkers, and this time it's giving us again a bunch of text board layouts. Okay, where's the code? Okay, there we go. We finally got it, and he chose

Python here, and here's the Python game that ChatGPT wrote. It does not have any pieces, I can't start a new game. Okay, so it just made the board. So I'll just give it one prompt to try to fix it, although I didn't give Claude any prompts. Okay, here's a new one. We got pieces this time. And okay, it did not add any functionality, so it just basically designed a game that doesn't do anything. So I don't know. So far, I've tested this a handful of times, and every single time, Claude 3.5 Sonet when it came to any type of coding. It be ChatGPT 40. Okay, let's test out complex reasoning here. So here's the prompt: At a party, each guest shakes hands with every other guest exactly once. If there were a total of 66 handshakes, how many guests were at a party? Okay, so CHP created a nice formula over here, and I know the answer is 12. So let's see if we get to that answer.

came up with two answers 12 And1. Since the guest can't be negative, the number is 12, and it gave us that answer. Let's try Claude. Okay, Claude took the same path. It came up with 12 or1. Since the answer can't be negative, the number must be 12. Okay, let's try this one. What has a voice that can't speak, it has a bed but never sleeps, it has a mouth but never eats, and it runs but it has no feet. Okay, Claude says this is a riddle and the answer is a river, and chat GPT same thing it thinks it's a river. Okay, I'm obviously not doing a scientific test, but you could see they're both kind of doing a good job when it comes to logic and solving riddles and puzzles. Now this next one is for Content creation, so what I'm going to do is I'm going to give it a YouTube script. I'm just going to upload my last YouTube script here, and I'm going to ask it to turn it into a tweet. This is my

prompt extract the core lessons and actionable items from this YouTube script. Condense it into a concise tweet or LinkedIn post suitable for quick consumption. And I'll add that YouTube transcript here. Okay, here's our tweet. CLA 3.5 Sonnet and new free AI model from anthropic outperforms GPT 4. If forgot the 40 part on most benchmarks. Improvement in speed vision 200k context window introduces artifacts. Okay, really nice. There is no reason why besides fixing this little missing o here. I would use this right here. You created a couple hashtags. It's good. Usually I'm having a hard time finding even when I'm building my own GPTs to do a really good job where I would actually use that tweet or that LinkedIn post. Okay, so chat GPT decided to give us a tweet and a LinkedIn post. So the other one only gave us one and then I guess I could use it for both. But look at this tweet. New CLA 3.5 is here faster.

subscriptions dive into the future. Never would I use that. That's just extremely, uh, bad. Okay, if I see a post like this, I'm not following that person, right? That is not a useful post. So once again, it looks like Claw 3.5 Sonet is beating Chat GPT. Okay, so with my practical test, Claw 3.5 Sonnet came ahead overall, but huge limitations I want to point out. So if you had to choose between one of them, here's a huge limitation. When it comes to the paid subscription, you don't have web browsing with Claw, a huge downside. The information is not going to be relevant and up to date if you use this for research. I recommend you use perplexity. Anyway, for research, even the free version of perplexity is going to beat both of these. I think that's a huge downside for Claw. If you need to create images, huge downside for Claw. Claw doesn't have a good way to search any previous conversations, but neither does Chat GPT. But Chat GPT does if you

have the desktop app, or if you have the mobile app, they have a search function, which is huge. It's missing though right now inside of the ChatGPT website for some reason. Now, two huge downsides with Claude: it doesn't yet have memory function, and that, I had no idea how much it's going to improve the functionality of ChatGPT. By default, when you talk to it, sometimes you store things to memory, and it gets smarter and smarter based on your previous conversations and gives you better responses. So, that's a huge benefit of ChatGPT, and the biggest reason why I would choose GPT-3.5 over Claude is because with a paid version of ChatGPT, you could build custom GPTs. Those are very specific little mini GPTs, basically with your knowledge base and with your very specific set of instructions. For my company, we've built well over, I think we have 15-20 different custom GPTs, and each one does a very specific task. At this point, I wouldn't really even know how to

function day-to-day without those. Claude obviously just doesn't have those co-pilot for some reason is getting rid of those. But that is my favorite part of generative AI is those custom GPTs that I could train to do just do one thing really really well where the broad version of chat GPT and CLA are just not going to be that good at it right. They don't have that specific knowledge base. They don't have that specific set of instructions. So I've covered custom GPTs in a different video and exactly how to build them. So if you haven't watched that and you're not using that I highly recommend them. They will solve so many issues for you and it will save you so much time throughout the week. So I'll link that video here. I hope you found this head-to-head useful and you can make a clear decisions between the two right now just from the function for my personal use. I kind of have to use both because some of these coding just basic coding things that I'm doing just CLA is

just so much better with that. So I'm going to use Claud for that kind of stuff. I'm going to use chat GPT for my everyday writing, summarization, things like that, and I'm going to use perplexity for research. I'll see you in the next video.

GPT-4o VS Claude 3.5 Sonnet - Which AI is #1?

Stay on the cutting edge of AI! 

I showcase the latest and greatest AI applications, models, and tools as soon as they are released. 

Whether it's chatbots, voice assistants, generators, algorithms or anything AI-related, you'll find demos, tutorials, reviews and insider tips right here. 

With new AI tech launching almost daily, I'll keep you up-to-date on everything from ChatGPT and Midjourney, to the next big thing. 

Subscribe now to join the AI revolution!