Connect with us

Noticias

which AI assistant is best for you?

Published

on

Artificial intelligence (AI) isn’t just some futuristic concept anymore, it’s woven into our daily lives now. And if you’re a writer like me, it’s become impossible to ignore. 

When OpenAI dropped ChatGPT in late 2022, the writing world had a collective moment of shock and curiosity. Could this AI churn out a novel? Craft a compelling ad campaign? Simplify calculus for a seven-year-old? More importantly, was this the beginning of the end for human writers?

Then, in early 2023, Anthropic launched Claude, shifting the conversation from “What can AI do?” to “Which AI does it better?” Suddenly, comparisons were everywhere. Was Claude more creative? Was ChatGPT more generic? Which one felt more human?

At the time, I thought these debates were premature. Both models were fresh out of the lab, still evolving. But now, in 2025, after major updates and years of real-world use, the battle between Claude and ChatGPT has become far more interesting. 

So, I put them to the test, evaluating their capabilities across content creation, research, problem-solving, and creative writing. And while both have grown into powerhouses, the real differences lie not just in raw performance but in how they’re designed to serve different needs.

In this article, I’ll take you through my hands-on experience with both AI models, covering everything from onboarding and usability to response quality and overall performance. By the end, you’ll have a clearer idea of which AI is the best fit for you.

TL;DR: Key takeaways from this article

  • ChatGPT makes getting started a breeze, with a seamless sign-up process and intuitive navigation, while Claude offers a sleeker, distraction-free interface for a more minimalist experience.
  • Claude delivers structured, articulate responses that feel naturally human, whereas ChatGPT thrives on flexibility and adaptability, making it better for a wide range of tasks.
  • ChatGPT, especially with GPT-4 Turbo, generates responses quickly, while Claude takes its time to craft more nuanced and thoughtful answers.
  • Both tools are easy to use, powered by impressive models, and excel in creative writing, brainstorming, coding, and deep analysis.
  • The right choice depends on you: Need versatility and speed? Go with ChatGPT. Prefer depth and structured thinking? Claude is your best bet.

What are Claude and ChatGPT? 

Before diving into the head-to-head comparison, let’s break down what these two AI tools actually are and how they work.

Claude: Anthropic’s thoughtful AI assistant

What is Claude? 

Claude, developed by Anthropic AI, is a conversational AI chatbot and the name of the underlying Large Language Models (LLMs) that power it. Designed for natural, human-like interactions, Claude excels in a wide range of tasks, from summarization and Q&A to decision-making, code-writing, and editing.

Named after Claude Shannon (the pioneer of information theory), this AI assistant was built with an emphasis on safety, reliability, and context-aware reasoning. Unlike some AI models that rely on real-time internet access, Claude generates responses based solely on its training data, offering structured and coherent answers without pulling live web results.

Anthropic currently offers multiple versions of Claude, with one of its standout features being extended memory, allowing it to process up to 75,000 words at once — meaning it can analyze entire books and generate insightful summaries.

How does Claude work? 

Claude functions as a self-contained AI model, trained on vast amounts of text and code. It can generate creative content, translate languages, write code, summarize lengthy documents, and provide deep analytical insights. Available via web browsers and mobile apps (iOS and Android), it’s designed for users who need structured and in-depth responses across various domains.

However, unlike competitors such as ChatGPT and Google Gemini, Claude does not have live internet access and cannot fetch data from external sources. Instead, it operates based on the knowledge it has been trained on, making it particularly strong in context retention and logical reasoning.

Claude at a glance

Developer Anthropic
Year launched 2023
Type of AI tool Conversational AI and LLM
Top 3 use cases Content structuring, analytical reasoning, deep summarization
Who can use it? Writers, researchers, business professionals
Starting price $20 per month 
Free version Yes, with limitations

ChatGPT: OpenAI’s all-purpose AI assistant 

What is ChatGPT? 

If you’ve spent any time in the AI space, you’ve probably either used ChatGPT or heard someone rave about it. OpenAI’s groundbreaking chatbot burst onto the scene in late 2022 and instantly reshaped AI-assisted content creation, automation, and productivity.

Built on OpenAI’s latest GPT-4o model, ChatGPT does far more than just generate text. It helps users brainstorm, streamline workflows, summarize research papers, craft persuasive emails, and write complex code. Its ability to integrate with third-party tools has made it a favorite among marketers, developers, and business professionals looking to automate tedious tasks.

How does ChatGPT work? 

AD 4nXcEEIY9340gsSCvIBj7agDrBblZY2Je6UEaDdV4VSDAY1W sJqqJJQYF0y MkJ3r9EYvZ25GMc0rcE4u3c rkz4wgLfz5EUHUvqXlMKRqI0TQ JXd5pm9Z CGSR9tvRg96dBfuz w

ChatGPT leverages advanced deep learning techniques and reinforcement learning to produce fast, adaptable, and contextually relevant responses. While earlier models had limitations in contextual memory, newer iterations, especially GPT-4 Turbo, have dramatically improved response accuracy and efficiency.

Unlike Claude, ChatGPT can access real-time internet in its pro version, making it an excellent tool for live research, up-to-date insights, and SEO-driven content recommendations. Available through web browsers and mobile apps, it’s designed for both casual users and professionals who need a versatile AI assistant for a variety of tasks.

ChatGPT at a glance

Developer OpenAI
Year launched 2022
Type of AI tool Generative AI for natural language processing
Top 3 use cases Content creation, idea generation, SEO recommendations
Who can use it? Marketers, content creators, bloggers, SEO professionals
Starting price $20
Free version Yes, with limitations

The bottom line

Both Claude and ChatGPT have evolved into powerful AI tools, each with its strengths. Claude focuses on structured, logical, and deeply analytical responses, while ChatGPT is known for its versatility, speed, and real-time adaptability. The right choice ultimately depends on your specific needs and workflow, and that’s exactly what we’ll explore next.

Why I decided to compare Claude and ChatGPT

After spending years working with AI tools like ChatGPT and Claude, I felt it was time to put them to the test and see how they stack up. Both of these models are making waves in the world of generative AI, but I wanted to go beyond the surface and dive into the real-world experience of using them day in and day out. 

Whether you’re a writer, a researcher, or just someone curious about how these tools perform in practical settings, I believe this comparison will give you the insights you need to make an informed choice.

My goal for comparing Claude and ChatGPT

The objective of this deep dive was simple: 

I wanted to get a hands-on feel for each model’s strengths and weaknesses in a variety of tasks. Sure, Claude and ChatGPT are powerful, but how do they measure up when you push them to their limits? 

I tested everything from content creation to research, problem-solving, and creative writing, essentially putting them through a range of real-world challenges. This comparison isn’t just about numbers or abstract features. It’s about how these tools work for you in everyday situations.

Getting started with Claude and ChatGPT

Getting up and running with Claude and ChatGPT is a breeze, so let’s break down the sign-up and initial setup for each.

Sign up and initial set up

ChatGPT 

To get started with ChatGPT, all you need is an OpenAI account, which can be created swiftly using either your email address or a Google login. Once you’ve signed up, you’re greeted with a user-friendly dashboard that’s ready for you to dive into conversations. The sign-up process itself is quick, and after logging in, you’re pretty much set to explore everything ChatGPT has to offer.

Claude

For Claude, the sign-up process is just as simple, with a clean, minimalist user interface that feels welcoming and easy to navigate. Whether you’re using a desktop or mobile device, getting started takes just a few clicks. The sign-up flow is smooth and doesn’t throw unnecessary hurdles in your way. 

The AI will ask you to enter your name as a way to get to know you and jump into tasks right away, with an interface that’s more focused on getting you to your content.

My first impression of Claude and ChatGPT

From the moment I began interacting with both AI models, it was clear that each has a distinct personality. Claude has this polished, structured feel, like it’s thinking through every word carefully before responding. It’s almost as if you’re talking to a colleague who wants to make sure everything is perfect. 

On the other hand, ChatGPT felt a lot more dynamic and free-flowing. The conversations felt more flexible, with a natural give-and-take that’s both quick and engaging.

The first few responses from each AI model gave me a solid sense of what they were about. While Claude’s responses were incredibly detailed and logically structured, ChatGPT’s replies were more conversational and adaptable to a wide variety of contexts. 

How easy it is to get into Claude and ChatGPT

Let’s break down how each model feels when it comes to learning curve:

Claude

Onboarding with Claude was quick and straightforward. You’re welcomed with a clean, minimalist interface. There’s no clutter, which I appreciated. 

Navigating through tasks felt intuitive, but there’s still a bit of a learning curve when you start digging into more advanced features like content structuring or analysis, as well as style and model selection. Claude is made for more thoughtful, deliberate interactions, so it’s not about speed, but about crafting quality responses that require a bit more time.

ChatGPT

Now, ChatGPT’s user experience is built for speed and versatility. Signing up was just as easy, and once you’re in, it’s all about jumping into a conversation and getting things done. 

The interface is clean but it also feels a little more interactive and responsive, which is a nice touch. As a user, I could jump from one task to the next without missing a beat. Whether it was coding, brainstorming, or answering quick questions, ChatGPT kept pace easily. 

Key features comparison: Claude vs. ChatGPT

Both platforms are equipped with cutting-edge AI models, but they do have some nuances that make them stand out in different ways. 

First, let’s see how they are the same or similar.  

How Claude and ChatGPT are similar

To fully appreciate their unique strong points, you must first understand how similar they are.

Here’s how both AI tools are similar: 

1. They are both easy to use

One of the most striking aspects of both Claude and ChatGPT is just how approachable they are. Despite being powered by the latest advancements in AI, these tools offer a user experience that’s intuitive and easy to grasp. 

It doesn’t matter if you’re using them for the first time or the hundredth, getting the hang of them is as simple as searching for a recipe on Google. Both are state-of-the-art models capable of handling complex tasks, but you don’t need a PhD in AI to make them work

2. They are both powered by advanced language models

At their core, both Claude and ChatGPT are designed to engage in natural language processing (NLP), meaning they can understand and generate human-like responses. These models have been trained on vast datasets of text and code, making them incredibly proficient at generating human-like responses across a range of tasks, from creative writing to problem-solving.

The AI models are proficient in carrying on coherent, contextually relevant conversations. However, while the architecture and core technology are similar, there are key differences in how these models respond and adapt to various use cases (more on that in a bit).

3. They both integrate with third-party apps

Claude and ChatGPT can integrate seamlessly with third-party tools. This means you can automate tasks, trigger conversations, and even send AI-generated results directly to other platforms, all without having to lift a finger.

API pricing and cost efficiency

Claude

  • Claude 3.5 Sonnet: $3.00 per 1M input tokens, $15.00 per 1M output tokens.
  • Claude 3 Haiku: $0.25 per 1M input tokens, $1.25 per 1M output tokens.

ChatGPT

  • GPT-4: $5.00 per 1M input tokens, $15.00 per 1M output tokens.
  • GPT-3.5 Turbo: $0.50 per 1M input tokens, $1.50 per 1M output tokens.

4. They both have multi-use applications

Both AI models are versatile and serve a wide range of applications. From content creation and technical troubleshooting to brainstorming ideas and answering complex queries, Claude and ChatGPT can be used in various contexts. It can help streamline work processes, enhance creativity, and assist with problem-solving. 

How Claude and ChatGPT are different

The more I dug into their distinctive features, the clearer it became that Claude and ChatGPT have different strengths, making each better suited for certain use cases. 

Here’s a breakdown of where they diverge.

1. Ideal users

ChatGPT is the go-to if you need a versatile, all-in-one AI solution. The AI tool offers a vast array of functionalities, from image and video generation to voice features and web browsing. It’s perfect for exploring the full spectrum of AI capabilities.

Claude, on the other hand, excels when it comes to deep text and code work. Its sophisticated writing style, robust coding features, and ability to handle complex analytical tasks make it ideal for developers, writers, and analysts who require precision over breadth.

Verdict: A tie.

2. Models

Both Claude and ChatGPT offer cutting-edge models, but their approach to task specialization differs slightly.

Tool Model Description
ChatGPT GPT-4o A model for general-purpose tasks
GPT-4o mini The more affordable, speedy general-purpose model
o1 Advanced reasoning model for complex tasks
o1-mini Model ideal for complex reasoning
o1 Pro The most resource-intensive model, available exclusively on the $200/month ChatGPT Pro plan
Claude Claude 3.5 Sonnet The most intelligent model, ideal for nuanced tasks
Claude 3.5 Haiku A faster, (most) cost-effective option
Claude 3 Opus Powerful model for tackling complex tasks.

Verdict: A tie.

3. Creative work

When it comes to creativity, Claude outshines ChatGPT. Because creative work is subjective, Claude’s natural-sounding output makes it a better partner for writing. Its Styles feature lets you tailor the tone of your writing to fit various contexts (e.g., a casual memo, social media posts, or long-form content).

ChatGPT’s GPT-4o, while highly capable, can sometimes sound generic, often relying on phrases like “in today’s ever-changing landscape” or overusing bullet points. For truly creative tasks, Claude feels like the more human-like option.

Verdict: Claude wins. 

4. Image and video generation

ChatGPT takes the lead when it comes to media generation. Powered by DALL·E 3, it’s capable of producing stunning photorealistic images from text prompts. For users who want even more creative control, Sora enables video generation, making ChatGPT a versatile tool for image and video content creation.

Claude doesn’t offer direct image or video generation, but its powerful text-based capabilities still make it a top choice for writing and coding tasks.

Verdict: ChatGPT wins. 

5. Coding assistance

Claude stands out for coding thanks to its Artifacts feature, which allows you to see the results of your code in real time. Experienced developer or a beginner, this feature makes it easy to test and tweak your code instantly. 

ChatGPT, while a powerful coding assistant, doesn’t quite offer the same instant feedback loop. It can generate code, but it’s more difficult to preview the results immediately within the chat.

Verdict: Claude wins. 

6. Real-time Internet access

ChatGPT has a clear advantage when it comes to browsing the web for real-time information. Thanks to its ChatGPT Search feature, users can access up-to-date info directly from the web, even if the query is about current events.

Claude, however, still suffers from a knowledge cutoff, meaning if you need the latest info, ChatGPT is your best bet.

Verdict: ChatGPT wins.

7. Pricing

When it comes to pricing, both Claude and ChatGPT offer flexibility, but their models differ in terms of cost structure and what you get for your money. 

Here’s a quick breakdown of their pricing tiers:

ChatGPT pricing

Plan Features Cost
Free Access to GPT‑4o miniReal-time web searchLimited access to GPT‑4o and o3‑miniLimited file uploads, data analysis, image generation, and voice modeCustom GPTs $0/month
Plus Everything in Free, plus:Extended messaging limitsAdvanced file uploads, data analysis, and image generationStandard and advanced voice modes (video and screen sharing)Access to o3‑mini, o3‑mini‑high, and o1 modelsCustom GPT creationLimited access to Sora video generation $20/month
Pro Everything in Plus, plus:Unlimited access to all reasoning models (including GPT‑4o)Advanced voice features, higher limits for video and screen sharingExclusive research preview of GPT‑4.5o1 Pro mode for high-performance tasksExpanded access to Sora video generationResearch preview of Operator (U.S. only) $200/month

Claude pricing

Plan Features Cost
Free Access to the latest Claude modelUse Claude on web, iOS, and AndroidAsk about images and documents $0/month
Pro Everything in Free, plus:More usage than FreeOrganize chats and documents with ProjectsAccess additional Claude models, including Claude 3.7 Sonnet with extended thinking modeEarly access to new features $18/month (billed yearly); $20/month (billed monthly)
Team Everything in Pro, plus:More usage than ProCentralized billing and administrationEarly access to collaboration featuresAdmits minimum 5 users $25 per/user/month (billed yearly); $30/user/month (billed monthly)
Enterprise Everything in Team, plus:More usage than TeamExpanded context windowSSO, domain capture, role-based access, and fine-grained permissioningSCIM for cross-domain identity managementAudit logs Custom pricing

8. Extra features

ChatGPT also offers a range of unique features that make it stand out for everyday use:

  • Voice Mode: Without typing, you can converse with ChatGPT using just your voice, which is perfect for on-the-go interactions. The response time is impressive. 
  • Advanced Voice Mode: Give ChatGPT access to your phone’s camera and ask it questions about anything it can see. This feature can help you identify objects, read documents, and even give insights based on visual cues.
  • Task Automation: You can set up recurring tasks, like language practice or exercising, that are dynamically updated based on your needs. A simple “Every day at 6 p.m., give me a sentence in Spanish and ask me to translate it into English. Make them progressively more difficult” or “provide me with workout routines and remind me every morning at 6 a.m. to do my core exercise.”
  • Custom GPTs: ChatGPT allows users to create specialized GPTs for a variety of tasks, from coding to plant care coaching, broadening its utility.

Verdict: ChatGPT wins.

Comparison table: Claude vs. ChatGPT

Feature Claude ChatGPT
Company Anthropic OpenAI
AI Model Claude 3.5 SonnetClaude 3.5 HaikuClaude 3 Opus GPT-4oGPT-4o miniO1o1-mini
Best for  Long documents, writing, and coding Real-time web search, multimedia, automation
Real-time web access No Yes
Image Generation No Yes (DALL·E)
Video Generation No Yes (Sora)
Voice Mode No Yes
Interactive editor Artifact Canvas
Free version Yes Yes
Starting Price $20/month ($18 if billed yearly) $20/month for ChatGPT Plus
Writing style More natural and adaptive Customisable but sometimes generic
Context Window 200,000 tokens, or about 150,000 words 128,000 tokens, or about 96,000 words

My hands-on testing experience

After exploring the features and capabilities of both Claude and ChatGPT, I decided to put them through rigorous real-world testing. I wanted to see how they performed across different tasks and scenarios that writers, researchers, and everyday users might encounter. 

Here’s what I like and didn’t like during my hands-on testing:

What I liked about Claude

1. Thoughtfully structured responses

Claude consistently impressed me with its ability to provide thoughtfully structured responses that felt genuinely human. When I asked Claude to analyze complex topics or documents, it demonstrated remarkable contextual understanding and maintained coherent reasoning throughout its responses.

2. Natural writing style

One of the most striking aspects of Claude was its natural writing style. Whether I requested creative content, analytical breakdowns, or technical explanations, Claude produced text that flowed logically and avoided the formulaic patterns that often betray most AI-generated content. This natural quality made Claude’s outputs feel more authentic and ready to use with minimal editing.

3. Excellent handling of nuance

Another standout feature was Claude’s exceptional handling of nuance and ambiguity. When presented with complex ethical questions or scenarios requiring careful consideration of multiple perspectives, Claude showed an impressive ability to navigate these waters thoughtfully. Rather than offering simplistic answers, it acknowledged complexity and provided balanced, well-reasoned responses.

4. Powerful “Artifacts” feature

The Artifacts feature proved invaluable for coding tasks and document creation. Being able to see code execution results in real-time streamlined the development process significantly. For example, when I asked Claude to create a simple data visualization based on a dataset I provided, it not only generated the code but also displayed the resulting chart directly in our conversation, allowing for immediate feedback and iteration.

5. Impressive context window

Finally, Claude’s 200,000 token context window proved useful in practical scenarios. I tested this by asking it to analyze a page research paper, and it maintained remarkable coherence about details from the beginning of the document even when discussing conclusions at the end, something that would have required breaking the task into multiple prompts with other AI assistants.

What I liked about ChatGPT

1. Remarkable versatility

ChatGPT’s versatility immediately stood out during my testing. The integration of multiple capabilities — text generation, image creation, voice interaction, and web browsing — into a single platform created a seamless experience that felt truly next-generation.

2. Valuable real-time web access

The real-time web access feature proved invaluable for fact-checking and retrieving current information. When I asked about recent events or needed up-to-date statistics for an article I was writing, ChatGPT delivered accurate information without the knowledge cutoff limitations that hampered Claude’s responses to similar queries.

3. Impressive image generation

DALL-E integration for image generation was another highlight. When developing content for a mock marketing campaign, I was able to describe the visual concepts I wanted, and ChatGPT generated compelling images that matched my descriptions remarkably well. This saved considerable time that would otherwise have been spent searching for stock photos or working with a graphic designer.

4. Game-changing voice mode

The voice mode transformed how I interacted with the AI. During a busy day of multitasking, I found myself using ChatGPT like a virtual assistant, asking questions while cooking, brainstorming ideas while organizing my workspace, and dictating notes while walking. The natural-sounding voice responses made this feel less like using technology and more like conversing with a helpful colleague.

5. Practical custom GPTs

Custom GPTs proved surprisingly useful for specialized tasks. I created a custom GPT focused on SEO content analysis that consistently applied the same evaluation framework to my draft articles. Having this specialized tool available within the same interface as my general AI assistant streamlined my workflow considerably.

What I didn’t like in both models

1. Inconsistent factual accuracy

Despite their impressive capabilities, both Claude and ChatGPT demonstrated limitations with factual accuracy. While ChatGPT could access the web for current information, it occasionally misinterpreted or oversimplified complex topics. Claude, constrained by its knowledge cutoff, sometimes provided outdated information or declined to answer questions about recent developments altogether.

2. Overconfidence in incorrect information

Both assistants sometimes exhibited what some users have described as “confidence without competence,” delivering incorrect information with the same authoritative tone as accurate responses. This was particularly noticeable in specialized technical domains and required vigilant fact-checking on my part.

3. Limited creative originality

Creative writing tasks revealed limitations in both models. While they could generate serviceable content, neither consistently produced original or compelling creative work. Their outputs often felt derivative, drawing heavily on common patterns and tropes rather than demonstrating genuine creativity.

4. Problems with long-term memory

Long-term memory and conversation coherence became problematic in extended interactions with both assistants, but worse in ChatGPT. Despite their impressive context windows, both Claude and ChatGPT occasionally lost track of important details from earlier in our conversations, especially when those conversations spanned multiple days or sessions.

5. Unpredictable response times

Response time variability was frustrating with both models. While ChatGPT was generally faster, both assistants experienced unpredictable slowdowns during peak usage times. Claude’s more deliberate approach to generating responses meant that complex queries could sometimes take more than 60 seconds to process, an eternity when you’re trying to maintain a productive workflow.

6. Limitations in true reasoning

Finally, both models still struggle with tasks requiring genuine reasoning rather than pattern recognition. When presented with novel logical puzzles or asked to develop innovative solutions to complex problems, both assistants tended to fall back on familiar approaches rather than demonstrating the creative problem-solving abilities that characterize human intelligence.

How to make the most of both tools

If you’re investing time and potentially money in AI assistants like Claude and ChatGPT, you’ll want to maximize their value. 

Drawing from my extensive testing, here are some practical tips to help you get the most out of both tools:

1. Play to their unique strengths

Understanding the distinct advantages of each assistant allows you to direct the right tasks to the right tool. By matching tasks to the assistant best equipped to handle them, you’ll achieve better results with less frustration. 

Use Claude when you need thoughtful analysis of complex documents, nuanced ethical discussions, or naturally flowing written content. Turn to ChatGPT when you need real-time information, multimedia content generation, or voice interaction capabilities. 

2. Master the art of effective prompting

The quality of output from both assistants depends significantly on how you structure your prompts. Be specific about your goals, provide necessary context, and communicate your expectations regarding tone, length, and format. 

For complex tasks, break your requests into step-by-step instructions rather than asking for everything at once. When you receive a response that isn’t quite what you needed, refine your prompt rather than starting over. This iterative process helps the AI better understand your requirements.

3. Verify output

Neither Claude nor ChatGPT is infallible when it comes to factual accuracy. Develop a habit of verifying important information, especially for specialized knowledge domains or time-sensitive topics. This verification process becomes more efficient over time as you learn which types of information tend to be reliable versus which require additional scrutiny.

4. Leverage extended context windows

A context window in AI refers to the amount of text (in tokens) an AI model can “remember” and process at one time. Both assistants offer impressive context windows, but few users take full advantage of this capability. Rather than starting fresh in each conversation, build on previous interactions by referencing earlier discussions. 

With Claude’s 200,000 token window, you can include entire documents, previous drafts, relevant research, and detailed instructions in one prompt. This comprehensive context leads to more precise and relevant responses than a series of disconnected interactions would produce.

5. Create personalized workflows

Develop custom workflows that integrate both assistants into your productivity system. The complementary capabilities of these tools make them powerful partners in complex workflows. 

For example, you might use Claude to generate in-depth research and analysis, then use ChatGPT to transform those insights into visual presentations with accompanying images. Or use ChatGPT’s web browsing capability to gather current information before asking Claude to incorporate that data into a thoughtfully structured report.

6. Maintain conversation histories for important projects

Both Claude and ChatGPT allow you to save and organize conversations. Take advantage of this feature by maintaining dedicated conversation threads for significant ongoing projects. This approach preserves context and creates a searchable record of your AI-assisted work. 

Final verdict: Which AI model should you choose between ChatGPT vs. Claude?

When it comes to creative projects, whether you’re writing, coding, or brainstorming, Claude is the clear winner. Its natural writing style, powerful Artifacts feature for real-time code visualization, and sharp analytical abilities make it perfect for developers, writers, and analysts who need depth and precision. 

However, if you’re after a jack-of-all-trades AI tool, ChatGPT has the edge. Text generation is just the beginning: ChatGPT lets you generate images, search the web, automate tasks, and use specialized custom-built GPTs for specific needs, like academic research. Its diverse capabilities make it perfect for teams and individuals looking to explore the full range of AI functionalities.

You may want to use both tools if you have multiple AI needs. Claude could be your go-to for deep-dive writing and coding, while ChatGPT handles lighter tasks like quick searches, image generation, and voice interactions. This combination can help you maximize your workflow without hitting rate limits.

FAQs about Claude vs. ChatGPT

Claude vs. ChatGPT: Which AI model is better for writing?

Both Claude and ChatGPT shine in writing tasks but cater to different needs. ChatGPT is great for all-purpose writing, but Claude excels in creative writing.

Can I use both Claude and ChatGPT for free?

Yes, both AI models offer free versions, though they come with limitations such as reduced access to advanced features and functionality. If you want more power and additional features, paid plans are available.

Which AI is more accurate?

Even Claude and ChatGPT note that they are not always correct. But when it comes to accuracy, Claude generally provides more factually correct and structured responses, especially in tasks requiring in-depth analysis. ChatGPT, while conversational, might sometimes generate outdated or less precise information.

Which is better for coding, ChatGPT or Claude?

For coding tasks, Claude is the better choice. It has extensive training in programming languages, debugging, and code generation, making it a strong assistant for developers. ChatGPT, though powerful, doesn’t focus as much on coding.

Can Claude or ChatGPT remember past conversations?

Neither model retains long-term memory in their free versions. However, their premium offers improved context retention during a session, but once the conversation ends, it resets.

Are there any privacy concerns with using these AI models?

Both Claude and ChatGPT have data privacy policies in place. They don’t store individual conversations for long-term training, but sensitive or personal information should be used cautiously when interacting with any AI model.

Which AI model is best for business use?

ChatGPT is excellent for business-related tasks like marketing, content creation, image generation, customer support, and automation. Claude, on the other hand, is better suited for tasks requiring detailed analysis, research, and documentation, making it ideal for research teams and technical projects.

How often are these models updated?

Both Claude and ChatGPT are regularly updated. ChatGPT integrates advancements from newer models like GPT-4, while Claude continuously improves its AI capabilities, ensuring both remain competitive.

Disclaimer!

This publication, review, or article (“Content”) is based on our independent evaluation and is subjective, reflecting our opinions, which may differ from others’ perspectives or experiences. We do not guarantee the accuracy or completeness of the Content and disclaim responsibility for any errors or omissions it may contain.

The information provided is not investment advice and should not be treated as such, as products or services may change after publication. By engaging with our Content, you acknowledge its subjective nature and agree not to hold us liable for any losses or damages arising from your reliance on the information provided.

Always conduct your research and consult professionals where necessary.

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Tu dirección de correo electrónico no será publicada. Los campos obligatorios están marcados con *

Noticias

La coalición insta a la fiscal general de California a detener la transición con fines de lucro de Openai

Published

on

Una coalición de organizaciones sin fines de lucro, fundaciones y grupos laborales de California está planteando preocupaciones sobre el fabricante de chatgpt Openai, instando al fiscal general del estado a detener los planes de la startup de inteligencia artificial de reestructurarse como una empresa con fines de lucro.

Más de 50 organizaciones, dirigidas por LatinoProsperity y la Fundación San Francisco, firmaron una petición que fue enviada a Atty. La oficina del general Rob Bonta el miércoles, solicitando que investigue la compañía liderada por Sam Altman.

“Operai comenzó su trabajo con el objetivo de desarrollar la IA para beneficiar a la humanidad en su conjunto, pero su intento actual de alterar su estructura corporativa revela su nuevo objetivo: proporcionar los beneficios de la IA, el potencial de ganancias y control incalculables sobre lo que puede convertirse en poderosas tecnologías de alteración mundial, a un puñado de inversores corporativos y empleados de alto nivel”, dijo la petición.

La oficina de Bonta no tuvo un comentario inmediato.

En un comunicado, OpenAi dijo que su junta “ha sido muy claro” que tenemos la intención de fortalecer la organización sin fines de lucro para que pueda cumplir su misión a largo plazo “.

“No lo estamos vendiendo, estamos duplicando su trabajo”, dijo la compañía. “Esperamos los aportes y los consejos de los líderes que tienen experiencia en organizaciones comunitarias sobre cómo podemos ayudarlos a lograr sus misiones, como lo anunció recientemente la creación de nuestra Comisión Asesora”.

Operai, con sede en San Francisco, comenzó como una organización sin fines de lucro en 2015 y luego lanzó una subsidiaria con fines de lucro para supervisar sus operaciones comerciales. Actualmente, el tablero de la organización sin fines de lucro supervisa esa subsidiaria, que desarrolla productos y servicios, incluidos ChatGPT y la herramienta de texto a video Sora.

Pero a medida que la competencia entre las compañías de IA se calentó, OpenAi dijo que necesitaba cambiar su estructura comercial para recaudar más dinero. En diciembre, Openai dijo que exploraría la transición de su subsidiaria comercial a una corporación de beneficios público, un tipo de negocio con fines de lucro en el que la organización sin fines de lucro de OpenAI tendría una participación de la propiedad pero ya no la controlaría.

Cuando Operai comenzó como un laboratorio de investigación sin fines de lucro, no había planes para un producto, solo planea publicar trabajos de investigación, dijo Altman a Newsletter Stratechery en marzo.

Con el tiempo, Operai se ha convertido en un líder en el espacio de IA, con 500 millones de personas que usan ChatGPT semanalmente. Si pudiera regresar, dijo Altman, habría establecido la compañía de manera diferente.

“Sabíamos que escalar computadoras iba a ser importantes, pero aún así subestimamos cuánto necesitábamos para escalarlas”, dijo Altman en una conversación con Harvard Business School.

Otras nuevas empresas de IA, incluidas Antropic y XAI, son corporaciones de beneficios públicos.

El cambio propuesto en la estructura de OpenAI levantó las cejas entre algunos líderes sin fines de lucro. La petición era dudosa de que los activos caritativos de OpenAI estuvieran protegidos, acusados ​​OpenAi de no cumplir con las reglas sin fines de lucro y expresar las preocupaciones de que otras nuevas empresas usarían una estructura sin fines de lucro “para crear posibilidades aceleradas y amplificadas para beneficios financieros individuales”.

La junta sin fines de lucro de Openai pasó por una sacudida en 2023. La junta votó para despedir a Altman por presunta falta de franqueza consistente en sus comunicaciones con los miembros de la junta. Fue reinstalado cinco días después, y la junta fue reestructurada, con varios miembros de la junta opositores que se fueron.

El mes pasado, Openai dijo que completó una ronda de financiación de $ 40 mil millones dirigida por SoftBank, lo que eleva su valoración a $ 300 mil millones. Como parte del acuerdo, SoftBank puede reducir su inversión si OpenAI no cambia su estructura corporativa para fin de año.

A diferencia de las empresas con fines de lucro, las organizaciones sin fines de lucro están limitadas en cómo se utilizan los fondos recaudados.

“No pueden vender acciones u ofrecer devoluciones”, dijo Neil Elan, socio del bufete de abogados Stubbs Alderton & Markiles. “La equidad es lo que impulsa muchos de estos modelos de alta valoración. También es difícil competir completamente con Meta, Microsoft y Google, que tienen acceso a muchos más recursos … sin fondos comparables”.

Operai ahora se ubica como la segunda compañía privada más valiosa, vinculada con la empresa matriz de Tiktok, Bytedance, según la firma de investigación CB Insights. La firma privada con la mayor valoración es SpaceX de Elon Musk con $ 350 mil millones.

“Este es un tipo de conversión sin precedentes en términos de su tamaño y solo queremos asegurarnos de que el Fiscal General realmente ejerce sus poderes para proteger esos activos de caridad”, dijo Orson Aguilar, director ejecutivo y presidente fundador de LatinoProsperity, una organización sin fines de lucro con sede en Los Ángeles que se enfoca en avanzar en las políticas que construyen wething en la comunidad latina.

Algunos líderes sin fines de lucro dijeron que lo que está sucediendo con OpenAI les recuerda la transición que los proveedores de atención médica sin fines de lucro hicieron a las fines de lucro en la década de 1990. Los líderes gubernamentales intervinieron para ayudar a regular ese proceso.

LatinoProsperity, la Fundación San Francisco y otras organizaciones sin fines de lucro plantearon preocupaciones por primera vez al Fiscal General en enero.

Bonta ha buscado más información sobre la reestructuración de Openai, y su fiscal general adjunto se comunicó con la startup y solicitó que proporcione más detalles. A principios de este año, la oficina de Bonta le dijo a los medios de comunicación Calmatters que es una investigación continua y que el departamento “está comprometido a proteger los activos caritativos para su propósito previsto y toma en serio esta responsabilidad”.

Aguilar dice que “no ha habido ninguna acción significativa”.

Algunos de los competidores de Openai se han opuesto a los planes de la compañía. El año pasado, Meta escribió al Fiscal General. Musk, cofundador de OpenAi que ahora dirige al rival Xai, demandó a OpenAi, buscando evitar que Operai cambie su estructura corporativa.

Nathanael Fast, director del Centro Neely para el Liderazgo ético y la toma de decisiones en la USC Marshall School of Business, cree que OpenAi podrá avanzar con sus planes a pesar de la oposición.

“La gran pregunta es, ¿qué sucederá con los valores que tienen una vez que todo el polvo se asienta y se convierten en una corporación que compite con otras corporaciones con fines de lucro?” Dijo Fast. “¿Tendrán valores únicos a los que se mantienen desde sus primeros días como una organización sin fines de lucro? ¿O se verán como cualquier otra compañía orientada a las ganancias?”

Continue Reading

Noticias

Crea tu propia figura de acción de IA con chatgpt

Published

on

El popular modelo AI, ChatGPT, ha introducido una nueva característica que permite a los usuarios crear sus propias figuras de acción. Al usar un mensaje simple, los usuarios pueden generar figuras de acción digital de sí mismos, imitando el estilo de juguetes coleccionables premium. Esta nueva característica ha ganado tracción, especialmente en plataformas de redes sociales como Tiktok, donde los usuarios muestran sus muñecas AI encerradas en el envasado al estilo “Barbie Box”.

Cómo crear su propia figura de acción con chatgpt

  • Visite el sitio web de ChatGPT o abra la aplicación CHATGPT.
  • Sube una foto tuya como referencia.
  • Ingrese el siguiente mensaje:
    “Use esta foto mía para crear una figura de acción de mí mismo en un paquete de ampolla, al estilo de un juguete coleccionable premium. La figura debe estar de pie y tener una sonrisa relajada y amigable. El paquete de ampolla debe tener un encabezado con el texto ”[ACTION FIGURE NAME]’En letras grandes y un subtítulo de'[SUBHEADING]’Debajo de él. Incluya accesorios en compartimentos al lado de la figura: [LIST OF ACCESSORIES]. “
  • Espere unos minutos para que la IA genere su figura de acción.
  • Si usa la versión gratuita de ChatGPT, tenga en cuenta que solo puede hacer tres solicitudes por día.

La tendencia creciente de las figuras de acción de IA

La tendencia de la figura de acción proviene del uso creciente de herramientas generativas de IA, como ChatGPT, para transformar selfies y fotos en avatares estilizados. Esta tendencia se basa en la estética “Barbiecore”, con un enfoque en los diseños y el empaque de Tellike. Evoca la sensación comercial y brillante de los anuncios de figuras de acción de los años noventa y de los años 2000, que a menudo presentaban logotipos de juguetes, lemas y estadísticas de personajes imaginadas.

Figura 1: Un usuario compartido resultado del indicador en X que la convirtió en una muñeca Barbie

La generación de arte de IA se encuentra con envases de juguetes retro

El surgimiento de las cifras de acción generadas por IA está vinculado a la creciente popularidad de los estilos de juguete retro. Con la tendencia “Barbiecore” que se afianza, muchos usuarios se sienten atraídos por la sensación nostálgica de las figuras de acción en caja. Estas interpretaciones digitales combinan temas futuristas con una sensación de estética de juguete vintage. Las herramientas de generación de imágenes de ChatGPT permiten a los usuarios personalizar sus figuras de acción con diferentes atuendos, poses y accesorios, lo que hace que el proceso sea altamente personalizable.

Instrucciones para crear figuras de acción con ChatGPT

  • Abra el chatgpt con generación de imágenes habilitada (disponible en chatgpt plus y planes profesionales).
  • Comience ingresando un mensaje personalizado. Por ejemplo:
    “Genere una imagen de una persona diseñada como una figura de acción futurista en una caja de juguetes de plástico, con colores audaces, accesorios e iluminación dramática. Incluya las frases ‘Edición coleccionable’ y ‘Modo de héroe activado’ en el empaque”.
  • Personalice el aviso describiendo características, estética o temas, como Space Explorer, Fantasy Warrior o Tech Ninja.
  • Cargue una foto o selfie de referencia de alta resolución para una mejor orientación sobre la salida visual.
  • Especifique los detalles en la solicitud, como el color del cabello, el atuendo o la pose para retener en la figura generada.
  • Revisa la imagen. Si es necesario, ajuste el indicador para ajustar el fondo, los accesorios o el diseño de empaque.
  • Solicite texto y efectos en la imagen, como etiquetas de juguetes, estadísticas ficticias o nombres de personajes.
  • Descargue la imagen una vez satisfecha con el resultado.
  • Comparta la imagen de figura de acción generada en sus plataformas de redes sociales preferidas.

Subiendo una foto para obtener los mejores resultados

Una vez que se escribe el mensaje, los usuarios pueden cargar una foto de alta resolución para guiar la IA en la generación de la figura. Esto permite que la IA incorpore características específicas como el color del cabello, el atuendo y la pose. Los usuarios pueden ajustar aún más sus descripciones para garantizar que la salida final cumpla con sus expectativas. La capacidad de ChatGPT para ajustar las imágenes basadas en la retroalimentación es una de sus fortalezas.

Agregar texto y efectos a la imagen

ChatGPT también permite a los usuarios agregar elementos de texto a sus creaciones de figuras de acción. Los usuarios pueden incluir etiquetas ficticias, clasificaciones de potencia y estadísticas de personajes. Un mensaje común para agregar texto podría ser: “Incluya el texto ‘Galáctico Defensor’ y una tabla de calificación de potencia en el costado del cuadro”. Estas adiciones mejoran aún más la sensación de tilo de las figuras digitales.

Las redes sociales zumban en torno a figuras de acción de IA

La tendencia se ha extendido rápidamente en las redes sociales, con los usuarios de Tiktok liderando el cargo. El hashtag #barbieboxChallenge ha atraído una atención significativa, con los usuarios que muestran sus avatares inspirados en la figura de acción. A medida que las herramientas generativas de IA como el chatgpt se vuelven más accesibles, más personas están experimentando convirtiéndose en figuras de acción coleccionables.

Popularidad e impacto de la tendencia

Si bien a ningún creador único se le atribuye el inicio de la tendencia, los usuarios de Tiktok han jugado un papel importante en su aumento. La naturaleza viral de la tendencia ha llamado la atención sobre el potencial del arte generado por IA y su influencia en la cultura digital. Los usuarios disfrutan de la novedad de convertirse en figuras de acción, compartiendo sus creaciones con seguidores y amigos.

Leer más: Brote de enfermedad de Legionnaires: seis casos vinculados a Sydney CBD

El éxito de la tendencia radica en su capacidad para combinar la nostalgia con la tecnología de IA moderna. Al usar herramientas de IA, los usuarios pueden transformar fácilmente sus fotos en figuras de acción estilizadas, que aprovechan el amor generalizado por coleccionables y juguetes retro.

El papel de Chatgpt en la tendencia

La capacidad de ChatGPT para generar figuras de acción lo ha convertido en un jugador clave en el movimiento de generación de arte de IA. La facilidad de uso y las opciones de personalización han contribuido a la popularidad de la función. A medida que más usuarios recurren a la IA generativa para proyectos creativos, el aviso de la figura de acción de ChatGPT proporciona una forma única y divertida de interactuar con el contenido generado por IA.

Un vistazo al futuro del arte y coleccionables de IA

La capacidad de crear figuras de acción personalizadas es solo un ejemplo de cómo las herramientas de IA están remodelando el arte digital y los coleccionables. Con la IA cada vez más avanzada, las posibilidades de personalización y creatividad se están expandiendo. Es probable que la tendencia de la figura de acción continúe creciendo, con más usuarios que adoptan la IA para llevar a sus personajes favoritos, y a ellos mismos, a la vida en forma coleccionable.

Descargo de responsabilidad

Visitado 684 veces, 685 visitas (s) hoy

Continue Reading

Noticias

Operai contrarresta a Elon Musk, afirma que su oferta de adquisición de $ 97.4 mil millones fue una ‘oferta simulada’

Published

on

Openai y su CEO Sam Altman han contrarrestado a su cofundador convertido en competidor Elon Musk, acusando al multimillonario de prácticas comerciales injustas y fraudulentas. Específicamente, los propietarios de ChatGPT afirman que la oferta de $ 97.375 mil millones de Musk para comprarlo en febrero fue una “oferta simulada” destinada deliberadamente a impedir los esfuerzos de OpenAi para recaudar fondos.

“A través de ataques de prensa, las campañas maliciosas se transmiten a los más de 200 millones de seguidores de Musk en la plataforma de redes sociales que controla [X]una demanda pretextual de registros corporativos, acosar reclamos legales y una oferta simulada para los activos de OpenAi, Musk ha probado todas las herramientas disponibles para dañar a OpenAi “, lea la demanda.

Ver también: Elon Musk dice que dejará de intentar comprar OpenAi si sigue siendo una organización sin fines de lucro

El miércoles, archivado a un tribunal de distrito de California, el contrarretista de OpenAI alega que la oferta de Musk de comprar la organización de IA por $ 97.375 mil millones no fue genuina y, de hecho, fue orquestada para obtener una ventaja comercial injusta. Aunque Musk fue uno de los fundadores de Operai, desde entonces se fue y fundó el competidor Xai.

“Musk se ha involucrado en estos esfuerzos para reducir la velocidad del progreso de Operai y perjudicar su capacidad de competir de manera efectiva en un campo cada vez más concurrido, pero también para aprovechar y mantener para Xai un borde no ganado diseñado para afectar la competencia más ampliamente por el único beneficio de Xai de Musk, a expensas del interés público”, dice OpenAi.

En apoyo de sus reclamos, OpenAi argumenta que no había evidencia de fondos disponibles para respaldar el precio de compra propuesto por $ 97.375 mil millones de Musk, y que parecía no haber base para el número en el que había aterrizado “que no sea una referencia cómica a la serie de ciencia ficción favorita de Musk”.

Como tal, Openai alega que las acciones de Musk fueron “intencionalmente … diseñadas para interrumpir [OpenAI’s] Las relaciones económicas y de hecho interrumpieron esas relaciones “, afirmando que sus tratos con los inversores actuales y potenciales se volvieron” más costosos y pesados ​​”debido a la oferta de adquisición pública de Musk. También señaló que la” amenaza “de una adquisición de almizcle había tenido empleados de OpenAI considerando la posibilidad de” Acción Empleo Arbitrary Chaos y Arbitrary, “después de haber visto su manejo de Twitter (ahora X) después de la adquisición en 2022.

“Sin limitación, la oferta complicó el proceso para emprender cualquier reorganización corporativa y, en última instancia, puede aumentar [OpenAI’s] Costo de capital “, afirmó la contratación.

Operai solicita daños, así como una orden judicial permanente que evita que Musk interfiera aún más con sus relaciones comerciales.

“[T]El riesgo de daño futuro e irreparable es agudo, a la luz de [Musk’s] Patrón de conducta abusiva de años, que involucra, entre otras cosas … presentando y retirando reclamos legales con fines de acosar [OpenAI] y orquestar una oferta simulada para adquirir supuestamente [OpenAI’s] Activos, “Lea la presentación”. Cada fase de la campaña de Musk ha sido diseñada para obligar a OpenAi a desviar los recursos, gastar dinero o ambos “.

Elon Musk vs. OpenAi

Musk no ha ocultado su objeción a la transición de OpenAi de una organización sin fines de lucro a una empresa con fines de lucro, o su decisión de no liberar su inteligencia general artificial como código abierto. El multimillonario inicialmente demandó a OpenAi en marzo pasado, alegando que los cambios equivalían a un incumplimiento de contrato e intentaban obligar a la organización a volver a un modelo sin fines de lucro. Según Musk, había habido un “acuerdo de fundación” de que la tecnología de OpenAi sería de código abierto “en beneficio de la humanidad”.

En respuesta, Openai alegó que no existía tal acuerdo fundador, produciendo correos electrónicos que parecían demostrar que Musk era consciente de sus planes para convertirse en una organización con fines de lucro. Según los informes, Musk incluso había intentado tomar posesión del propio Operai, ofreciendo resolver sus problemas de financiación a cambio de un control completo. (Declinaron, y en 2018 Musk dejó la organización). El multimillonario posteriormente eliminó su demanda sin explicación en junio, justo un día antes de que un juez se pusiera a escuchar la solicitud de despido de OpenAi.

Sin embargo, la carne de carne de Musk no había terminado, y en agosto presentó una nueva demanda que su abogado llamó “mucho más contundente”. Esta vez, Musk afirmó que fue “manipulado” para cofundar Operai, aunque sus argumentos fueron bastante similares a los de su traje previamente retirado.

“Las acciones sin escalas de Elon contra nosotros son tácticas de mala fe para frenar a OpenAi y tomar el control de las principales innovaciones de IA para su beneficio personal”, publicó el miércoles la cuenta oficial de X de OpenAI. “Elon nunca ha sido sobre la misión. Siempre ha tenido su propia agenda. Trató de apoderarse del control de OpenAi y fusionarlo con Tesla como una con fines de lucro, sus propios correos electrónicos lo demuestran. Cuando no se salió con la suya, irrumpió”.

Aunque Operai afirmó que Musk es “sin duda uno de los mejores empresarios de nuestro tiempo”, también llamó su comportamiento “solo historia en repetición, Elon se trata de Elon”.

La respuesta de Musk ha sido recurrir a insultos, publicar, “Scam Altman está en eso nuevamente”.

Operai no especificó exactamente qué serie ficticia sospechaba que Musk estaba haciendo referencia con su oferta de adquisición de $ 97.375 mil millones. Sin embargo, no sería la primera vez que Musk parecía tomar decisiones comerciales basadas en números de bromas. El propietario de X cayó en conflicto con la Comisión de Bolsa y Valores de los Estados Unidos (SEC) en 2018 cuando publicó que estaba “considerando llevar a Tesla en privado a $ 420” y tenía “fondos asegurados”. Este número está popularmente asociado con el uso de marihuana, aunque Musk luego afirmó que su publicación no era una broma cuando se le llamaba para testificar al respecto en la corte. Tesla actualmente sigue siendo una empresa que cotiza en bolsa.

Tampoco sería la primera vez que Musk ha hecho una oferta de adquisición de autenticidad cuestionable. En 2022, el multimillonario se ofreció infamemente a comprar Twitter por significativamente más que su valor en ese momento. Luego, Musk intentó retirarse del negocio comercial bastante horrible después de que Twitter aceptó, pero finalmente se vio obligado a hacerlo después de que Twitter demandó. El valor de la compañía posteriormente se desplomó bajo su liderazgo, cayendo en casi un 80 por ciento en solo dos años.

Continue Reading

Trending