5 ms·

I have the pro account for ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, and Grok. They all have various strengths and weaknesses. My favorite is still ChatGPT, then Gemini/Claude,

I have the pro account for ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, and Grok. They all have various strengths and weaknesses. My favorite is still ChatGPT, then Gemini/Claude, then Grok. Grok often feels 1-2 generations behind the competition in general use, but it has three things that I love: 1. It seems to be the best at understanding current events. Maybe due to X integration, or some other tool call optimization in the backend? I don't know, but I often ask about things going on, and the other models have outdated info, give unhelpful answers, etc. 2. It is generally the least sycophantic for personal things. Anthropic is getting here too. ChatGPT and Gemini are working on this, but previous models in those families would almost never say anything negative about what I am doing. Sometimes I need career advice, personal advice, etc and I like the tone of how it responds. I think Claude will be caught up soon. 3. For professional work, there are certain topics that other models would refuse to engage with. At my last company we had an enormous amount of legal users. When a deposition would need a summary on certain topics, most models would refuse. Grok would not. I understand the need for safety and I don't blame the other model providers, but for some professional use cases you NEED a model that is capable of handling sensitive subjects.

epolanski 3mo ago
My SO works in audit/compliance and business Gemini definitely does not refuse to answer.
e9 3mo ago
I recently worked with NRC dataset, specifically about nuclear reactor events and status reports(example: https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/event-status/event/en https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/event-status/...). Public data that just needed some cleaning. Several time Claude API would refuse to engage. Because of that I can't trust Claude to clean production data sets.
Azantys 3mo ago
Career and personal advice from LLMs, not sure if thats your best bet
deaton 3mo ago
All 4 of these still regularly insist that I am a genius and everything I say is brilliant. Grok definitely pushes back more than the others, but I don't like how sycophantic they all still are.
- pell 3mo ago
  I don’t want to open up that whole can of worms but Grok on any vaguely philosophical or political topic is a scaredy cat and has a very hard time staying factual if it could make Musk or the conservative movement appear negatively.
square_usual 3mo ago
Opus 4.8 has made huge jumps in being less sycophantic. I see it pushing back on ideas a lot, and that's very helpful when you're evaluating options.
- lachlan_gray 3mo ago
  Almost too much so, it often feels like opus is pushing back for the sake of pushing back. The way old models used to add disclaimers to every message regardless of content
  - NewJazz 3mo ago
    That's because it can't literally reason, it has just been manually steered into those reasoning speech cycles.
    - emodendroket 3mo ago
      Yes, yes. Does everyone still find it interesting to go over this point every time about how it's not literally a person with human reasoning?
      - NewJazz 3mo ago
        Uh, only when people don't seem to understand it, or try to personify it. Which is quite often.
        emodendroket 3mo ago
        People “personify” their cars but I don’t think because they think cars have human cognition
        NewJazz 3mo ago
        Not in the same way.
nonethewiser 3mo ago
What are you using it for? Im pretty surprised ChatGPT is your top model but maybe you arent using it for code.
- fragmede 3mo ago
  codex-5.5 > Opus 4.7, imo.
cactusplant7374 3mo ago
But in terms of agentic coding? Dead last.
htx80nerd 3mo ago
My favorite was ChatGPT, and I still use it often, but it becomes way too 'hair splitting' argumentative too often over very minor non controversial topics. Like it's always going out of its way to "well actually..." Grok used to be really really bad ~8 months ago or so, but it's gotten better. ChatGPT team needs to turn down the 'disagree just because' factor by a lot.
selicos 3mo ago
1. It seeks to manipulate the information you see and your lens to the world. This is already partially true from independent and major publications. As soon as we hand over searching out information to social media algorithms and LLM tools, we abandon our ability to see reality outside our direct vision. Grok's ownership has already demonstrated capacity to influence major world elections and other events. You cannot trust it with this sort of information gathering and reporting.
emodendroket 3mo ago
> 1. It seems to be the best at understanding current events. Maybe due to X integration, or some other tool call optimization in the backend? I don't know, but I often ask about things going on, and the other models have outdated info, give unhelpful answers, etc. That makes sense, but occasionally you ask about an issue where it's clearly received political instruction from the commissar and it acts totally lobotomized. But it's true that Gemini will often blithely state that something could never happen and you'll say "what do you mean, that just happened" and then it comes back apologizing after running a Web search.
- timfsu 3mo ago
  We saw this too with Gemini specifically. My favorite example - we built a hallucination detector (given the input, does the output make any false claims) in Gemini, and after the Seahawks won the Superbowl in February, it would consistently flag that as "not possible".
  - emodendroket 3mo ago
    I believe it was assuring me the Israelis would never invade southern Lebanon and declare a buffer zone inside it after that had already happened.
- sawjet 3mo ago
  Do you have an example of this?
  - emodendroket 3mo ago
    Which "this"?
Traubenfuchs 3mo ago
> Anthropic is getting here too. I almost exclusively use claude for all my professional and private needs. In my experience it's really good at adhering to my wishes in regards to sycophancy and pushing back. If you really want to you can tell it to systematically push back on anything where pushback makes sense until it continues with the flow of conversation. In my first therapy session, the answers were too long and contained multiple questions, spawning multiple threads of conversation. I told it to tone it down and only ever ask one question back, maybe two, if they are related. The answers got too short. I told it to make them "slightly longer" again and reached a sweet spot. The conversation is yours to form! You need to find the "system prompts" and guidelines to give it that work for you.
deleted 3mo ago
[deleted]

epolanski 3mo ago

My SO works in audit/compliance and business Gemini definitely does not refuse to answer.

e9 3mo ago

I recently worked with NRC dataset, specifically about nuclear reactor events and status reports(example: https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/event-status/event/en https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/event-status/...). Public data that just needed some cleaning. Several time Claude API would refuse to engage. Because of that I can't trust Claude to clean production data sets.

Azantys 3mo ago

Career and personal advice from LLMs, not sure if thats your best bet

deaton 3mo ago

All 4 of these still regularly insist that I am a genius and everything I say is brilliant. Grok definitely pushes back more than the others, but I don't like how sycophantic they all still are.

pell 3mo ago
I don’t want to open up that whole can of worms but Grok on any vaguely philosophical or political topic is a scaredy cat and has a very hard time staying factual if it could make Musk or the conservative movement appear negatively.

square_usual 3mo ago

Opus 4.8 has made huge jumps in being less sycophantic. I see it pushing back on ideas a lot, and that's very helpful when you're evaluating options.

lachlan_gray 3mo ago
Almost too much so, it often feels like opus is pushing back for the sake of pushing back. The way old models used to add disclaimers to every message regardless of content
- NewJazz 3mo ago
  That's because it can't literally reason, it has just been manually steered into those reasoning speech cycles.
  - emodendroket 3mo ago
    Yes, yes. Does everyone still find it interesting to go over this point every time about how it's not literally a person with human reasoning?
    - NewJazz 3mo ago
      Uh, only when people don't seem to understand it, or try to personify it. Which is quite often.
      - emodendroket 3mo ago
        People “personify” their cars but I don’t think because they think cars have human cognition
        NewJazz 3mo ago
        Not in the same way.

nonethewiser 3mo ago

What are you using it for? Im pretty surprised ChatGPT is your top model but maybe you arent using it for code.

fragmede 3mo ago
codex-5.5 > Opus 4.7, imo.

cactusplant7374 3mo ago

But in terms of agentic coding? Dead last.

htx80nerd 3mo ago

My favorite was ChatGPT, and I still use it often, but it becomes way too 'hair splitting' argumentative too often over very minor non controversial topics. Like it's always going out of its way to "well actually..." Grok used to be really really bad ~8 months ago or so, but it's gotten better. ChatGPT team needs to turn down the 'disagree just because' factor by a lot.

selicos 3mo ago

1. It seeks to manipulate the information you see and your lens to the world. This is already partially true from independent and major publications. As soon as we hand over searching out information to social media algorithms and LLM tools, we abandon our ability to see reality outside our direct vision. Grok's ownership has already demonstrated capacity to influence major world elections and other events. You cannot trust it with this sort of information gathering and reporting.

emodendroket 3mo ago

> 1. It seems to be the best at understanding current events. Maybe due to X integration, or some other tool call optimization in the backend? I don't know, but I often ask about things going on, and the other models have outdated info, give unhelpful answers, etc. That makes sense, but occasionally you ask about an issue where it's clearly received political instruction from the commissar and it acts totally lobotomized. But it's true that Gemini will often blithely state that something could never happen and you'll say "what do you mean, that just happened" and then it comes back apologizing after running a Web search.

timfsu 3mo ago
We saw this too with Gemini specifically. My favorite example - we built a hallucination detector (given the input, does the output make any false claims) in Gemini, and after the Seahawks won the Superbowl in February, it would consistently flag that as "not possible".
- emodendroket 3mo ago
  I believe it was assuring me the Israelis would never invade southern Lebanon and declare a buffer zone inside it after that had already happened.
sawjet 3mo ago
Do you have an example of this?
- emodendroket 3mo ago
  Which "this"?

Traubenfuchs 3mo ago

> Anthropic is getting here too. I almost exclusively use claude for all my professional and private needs. In my experience it's really good at adhering to my wishes in regards to sycophancy and pushing back. If you really want to you can tell it to systematically push back on anything where pushback makes sense until it continues with the flow of conversation. In my first therapy session, the answers were too long and contained multiple questions, spawning multiple threads of conversation. I told it to tone it down and only ever ask one question back, maybe two, if they are related. The answers got too short. I told it to make them "slightly longer" again and reached a sweet spot. The conversation is yours to form! You need to find the "system prompts" and guidelines to give it that work for you.

deleted 3mo ago

[deleted]