This is the age of artificial intelligence (AI). In the last few months, hundreds of AI models have flooded the internet, ranging from simple conversational chatbots to advanced coding companions. Among these, ChatGPT, Microsoft Copilot, Google’s Gemini, Inflection’s Pi, and Anthropic’s Claude 2 have emerged as some of the top contenders in the generative AI space. Each model brings its own unique strengths and capabilities to the table, catering to different needs and preferences in the AI landscape.Â
In this article, we will delve into the differences between ChatGPT, Microsoft Copilot, Google’s Gemini, Inflection’s Pi, and Anthropic’s Claude 2.
Mixtral 8x22B vs 8x7B vs Mistral 7B: Which one is better? Check Here!
The Major Differences
Here are the prominent differences between these generative AI models:
- Coding, Math, and Data
For tasks requiring code help or solving intricate math issues, ChatGPT and Microsoft Copilot perform well. They can provide code snippets, translate languages of programming, and deal with difficult mathematical equations. Google’s Gemini also gives good backing in these aspects but it might not deliver as much across the board when compared to the other two options.
Another field where some generative AIs show potential is data analysis. Although both ChatGPT, Microsoft Copilot, and Google’s Gemini can handle data analysis tasks to some extent, they may not be the best choice for deep analysis. But for data summarization, both ChatGPT and Claude 2 do a good job.
- Summarizing Text and Custom Advice
All the generative AI tools in this list can assist you with summarizing lengthy texts or articles. But, Claude 2 is particularly good at providing summaries. For custom advice, both Pi and Claude 2 excel in conversational manners to give suggestions that fit your unique situation. Whereas, both Gemini and ChatGPT fall short of expectations in this aspect.
- Data Visualization and Integration
Both ChatGPT and Microsoft Copilot are good choices for tasks where you need to present data in formats such as tables or JSON. Also, the connection between these two tools is well-matched because Microsoft Copilot can be easily used with Microsoft 365 applications which can help in making work processes simpler.
- Real-time Information and Internet Access
ChatGPT (GPT-4) and Microsoft Copilot excel in quick use in present events or getting facts from the internet, are suggested. But, there is no online connection available with both Pi and Claude 2, which restricts them from reaching and handling real-time data.
- Image Generation
If you are looking for an AI that can create images with text, Microsoft Copilot is a good choice because it works together with DALL-E 2 which can generate images. GPT-4 also has an image generator that works well. However, other generative AIs mentioned here do not have image creation ability at present.
- Communication Style
ChatGPT, Microsoft Copilot, and Google’s Gemini have a more formal communication style. Pi has a highly conversational tone that is less serious with its responses. However, you can set the conversation tone and style for all these AI models.
- AI Hallucinations and Accuracy
AI hallucinations refer to the AI producing incorrect information. In this age of AI, it is posing a serious problem. Fortunately, all generative AIs on this list have a low to moderate rate of AI hallucinations.
What is Genie? All About Google’s Latest AI Model Creating Playable Virtual World
ChatGPT vs Microsoft Copilot vs Google’s Gemini vs Inflection’s Pi vs Anthropic’s Claude 2: At a Glance
| Capability | ChatGPT | Microsoft Copilot | Google Gemini | Inflection’s Pi | Anthropic Claude 2 |
| Coding Help | Excellent | Excellent | Good | Limited | Good |
| Math Problems | Excellent | Excellent | Good | Limited | Good |
| Data Analysis | Good | Good | Good | Limited | Good |
| Summarizing Text | Good | Good | Good | Limited | Excellent |
| Custom Advice | Good | Good | Good | Excellent (Conversational) | Good |
| Data Presentation (Tables, JSON, etc.) | Excellent | Excellent | Good | Limited | Good |
| Internet Connectivity | No (GPT-4: Yes) | Yes | Yes | No | No |
| Real-time Current Affairs | No (GPT-4: Yes) | Yes | Yes | No | No |
| Image Generation | No (GPT-4: Yes) | Yes (via DALL-E 2) | No | No | No |
| File Handling (PDFs, etc.) | No (GPT-4: Yes) | Yes | Limited | Limited | Yes |
| Conversational Style | Formal | Formal | Formal | Highly Conversational | Formal |
| Response Limitations | None | 30 per conversation | None | None | Limited in free version |
| AI Hallucinations Rate | Low | Low | Moderate | Moderate | Low |
| Integration with Office Apps | No | Yes (Microsoft 365) | No | No | No |
| Overall Improvement Since Last Review | Moderate | Good | Moderate | Moderate | High |
| Best Use Cases | Coding, Essays, Summaries | Office Tasks, Image Generation | Real-time Analysis, Google Apps | Life/Career Conversations | Data Summaries, Some Coding |
Who is Will DePue, College Dropout, Who Helped Build OpenAI’s Sora?
Which is Better?
The most suitable generative AI for you is determined by the particular requirements you have. Here is a brief summary of perfect-use situations for each tool:
ChatGPT (with access to GPT-4): Coding, essays, summaries (with internet access)
Microsoft Copilot: Office tasks, image generation (via DALL-E 2 integration)
Google Gemini: Real-time analysis, Google Apps integration
Inflection Pi: Life/career conversations, casual interaction
Anthropic Claude 2: Data summaries, some coding, exceptional factual summaries
Each of these five AI models has its own strengths and weaknesses. Unfortunately, we cannot rule out the best of these five, since they each serve different purposes and excel in other areas. Ultimately, the final decision rests upon your shoulders.
