Claude vs. ChatGPT: Which is Better in 2024?

Why Trust Techopedia

As businesses and individuals alike use AI chatbots and large language models (LLMs), two prominent contenders have captured the spotlight: Claude AI vs. ChatGPT. Both chatbots have garnered attention for their advanced natural language processing capabilities and their potential to transform various industries.

In this article, we delve into various aspects of Claude vs. ChatGPT, including their model sizes, accuracy, efficiency, and use cases, to paint a comprehensive picture of how they stack up against each other.

So, which AI chatbot is best for your needs in 2024?

Key Takeaways

  • Claude has a larger context window (200k tokens) compared to ChatGPT (32k tokens).
  • Claude outperformed GPT-4 on the GPQA benchmark, while GPT-4 Turbo was better on GSM8K.
  • ChatGPT is more versatile, with features like image generation and internet access.
  • The optimal choice depends on the specific use case and priorities.

Key Differences Between Claude vs. ChatGPT

Before we delve into the technical specifics of the Claude LLM and ChatGPT, it’s essential to understand the key differences that set these two AI chatbots apart.

While both models are designed to engage in human-like conversations and assist with a wide range of tasks, they have distinct characteristics that make them unique.

One of the most significant differences between Claude and ChatGPT lies in their underlying architectures.


Claude is built on Anthropic’s proprietary AI architecture, which places a strong emphasis on safety and ethics.

This means that Claude has been designed from the ground up with safeguards in place to prevent harmful or biased outputs. Anthropic’s approach to AI development prioritizes transparency and accountability, ensuring that Claude operates within well-defined ethical boundaries.

On the other hand, ChatGPT is powered by OpenAI’s GPT architecture, which is known for its exceptional language understanding and generation capabilities.

GPT has been trained on a vast corpus of text data, allowing it to generate human-like responses across a wide range of topics. However, ChatGPT’s training process has raised concerns about the potential for biased or misleading outputs, as the model may inadvertently learn and reproduce problematic patterns present in its training data.

Another key difference between Claude and ChatGPT is their approach to handling context.

Claude boasts an impressive context window, allowing it to maintain coherence and relevance throughout extended conversations. This means that Claude can effectively keep track of previous interactions and build upon them, providing a more natural and intuitive conversational experience. In contrast, ChatGPT’s context handling is more limited, which can sometimes lead to inconsistencies or loss of context over longer exchanges.

It’s worth noting that AI chatbots are constantly evolving, with both Anthropic and OpenAI continuously working to enhance and refine their models.

As such, the differences between Claude and ChatGPT may shift over time as new updates and iterations are released. However, understanding the fundamental distinctions between these two chatbots provides a solid foundation for evaluating their capabilities and determining which one aligns best with specific needs and preferences.

Claude 3 vs GPT-4 benchmarks
Claude 3 vs GPT-4 benchmarks
Source: Anthropic

Model Variants

When comparing Claude vs. ChatGPT, it’s crucial to consider the different model sizes and variants available for each chatbot. These variations impact performance, capabilities, and use cases, allowing users to select the most appropriate model for their specific needs.

Claude, developed by Anthropic, comes in three distinct models: Claude 3 Haiku, Claude 3 Sonnet, and Claude 3 Opus. Each of these models has its own strengths and characteristics:

  • Claude 3 Haiku: This is the fastest and most lightweight model in the Claude family. It is designed for quick responses and efficient processing, making it suitable for real-time interactions and applications where speed is a priority.
  • Claude 3 Sonnet: With twice the speed of its predecessor, Claude 2, the Sonnet model offers a balance between performance and capability. It can handle more complex tasks while maintaining a good response time.
  • Claude 3 Opus: As the most advanced and powerful model in the Claude lineup, Opus is designed for demanding applications that require high accuracy and sophisticated language understanding. It excels in tasks such as creative writing, document analysis, and context-heavy conversations.

On the other hand, ChatGPT, powered by OpenAI’s GPT architecture, also comes in different variants:

  • GPT-3.5 models (including GPT-3.5-Turbo): These models are built on top of the original GPT-3 models but have been optimized for conversational chat. GPT-3.5-Turbo is currently used by the free version of ChatGPT and offers a cost-effective and flexible solution for a wide range of conversational tasks.
  • GPT-4 models (including GPT-4-Turbo): As the most advanced GPT models from OpenAI, these models are multimodal, accepting both text and image inputs, and can solve more complex problems with greater accuracy than previous models. However, they are slower and more expensive compared to GPT-3.5 models. GPT-4 models are used by the paid ChatGPT Plus service, offering users access to the highest level of performance and capabilities.
  • GPT-5 model: The newest version of GPT will possibly arrive by mid-year, bringing a whole range of new features, including Sora and the AI voice product ‘Voice Engine.’

The choice between these different model sizes and variants depends on the specific requirements of the user.

Factors such as performance, speed, accuracy, and the nature of the tasks at hand should be considered when selecting the most appropriate model for a given use case.

Accuracy and Benchmarks

Accuracy is a critical factor when evaluating the performance of AI chatbots like Claude and ChatGPT. To assess their accuracy, researchers and developers rely on various benchmarks and standardized tests that measure the models’ ability to understand and generate human-like language.

One widely recognized benchmark is the Generative Pre-trained Transformer Question Answering (GPQA) test, which evaluates a model’s ability to answer questions accurately.

In a comparison between Claude 3 Opus and GPT-4, Claude 3 Opus demonstrated superior performance, achieving a score of 95.0% compared to GPT-4’s 92.0%. This suggests that Claude 3 Opus has a higher level of accuracy in question-answering tasks.

However, it’s important to note that the GPQA benchmark was conducted against the default GPT-4 model and not the more advanced GPT-4 Turbo variant.

When considering the Grade School Math 8K (GSM8K) benchmark, which focuses on mathematical problem-solving, GPT-4 Turbo outperformed Claude 3 Opus, scoring 95.3% compared to Claude’s score.

These benchmark results highlight the nuances in performance between Claude and ChatGPT, indicating that their accuracy may vary depending on the specific task or domain.

While Claude 3 Opus excels in question-answering scenarios, GPT-4 Turbo demonstrates superior performance in mathematical reasoning.

It’s crucial to consider these benchmark results in the context of real-world applications. The accuracy of an AI chatbot directly impacts the quality and reliability of its outputs, which can have significant implications for businesses and individuals relying on these technologies for decision-making, content generation, and other critical tasks.

Efficiency and Speed

Assessing Claude vs. ChatGPT, it’s also essential to consider their efficiency and speed, as these factors directly impact the user experience and the chatbots’ suitability for various applications.

Both Anthropic and OpenAI have significantly optimized their models to deliver fast and efficient performance.

Claude, in particular, has been designed with speed in mind. The Claude 3 Haiku model is built for rapid response times, making it an ideal choice for real-time interactions and applications where quick processing is crucial. This lightweight model can handle tasks swiftly without compromising the quality of its outputs.

For users who require a balance between speed and capability, the Claude 3 Sonnet model offers an attractive option. With a processing speed twice as fast as its predecessor, Claude 2, Sonnet can tackle more complex tasks while maintaining an impressive response time. This makes it suitable for a wide range of applications that demand both efficiency and accuracy.

When it comes to processing large documents, Claude AI truly shines.

Its ability to handle extensive context windows allows it to efficiently analyze and summarize lengthy texts, such as research papers or legal documents. Claude’s speed in processing these large documents sets it apart from other AI chatbots, making it a valuable tool for industries that deal with vast amounts of textual data.

While specific speed comparisons between Claude and ChatGPT are not readily available, it’s clear that both chatbots have been designed to prioritize efficiency. OpenAI has made significant improvements to its GPT architecture, enabling ChatGPT to deliver fast and accurate responses across a wide range of tasks.

However, it’s worth noting that the more advanced GPT-4 models, such as GPT-4 Turbo, may have slower processing times compared to their GPT-3.5 counterparts. This is due to the increased complexity and capabilities of the GPT-4 architecture, which requires more computational resources to generate high-quality outputs.

Use Cases and Strengths

One of the key advantages of ChatGPT is its ability to process and generate content in diverse formats.

Beyond just text, ChatGPT can handle code, visuals, and even audio inputs, making it a versatile tool for developers, designers, and content creators. This multimodal capability allows users to leverage ChatGPT for a broad spectrum of tasks, from writing and coding to image analysis and audio transcription.

In contrast, Claude’s strengths lie in its exceptional language understanding and generation abilities. Anthropic’s focus on developing safe and ethical AI has resulted in a chatbot that excels in creative writing tasks.

Claude’s ability to generate engaging, imaginative, and coherent narratives sets it apart from other AI chatbots. Its deep understanding of context and nuance allows it to produce high-quality, human-like text that captures the desired tone and style.

When it comes to processing larger documents and maintaining context over extended conversations, Claude has a clear advantage.

Its expansive context window enables it to analyze lengthy texts, such as research papers, books, and legal documents while preserving the contextual integrity of the information. This makes Claude an invaluable tool for industries that require in-depth analysis and understanding of complex textual data.

In coding and complex reasoning tasks, both Claude and ChatGPT have demonstrated impressive capabilities. Developers have successfully utilized these chatbots to assist with programming tasks, such as code generation, debugging, and algorithm development. However, when it comes to mathematical reasoning and problem-solving, ChatGPT, particularly the GPT-4 Turbo variant, has shown a slight edge over Claude in benchmarks like GSM8K.

It’s important to note that the strengths and use cases of Claude AI and ChatGPT are not mutually exclusive. Both chatbots have the potential to be valuable assets in a wide range of industries, from healthcare and finance to education and entertainment. The choice between the two will ultimately depend on the specific requirements and priorities of the user or organization.

ChatGPT vs. Claude: A Test Drive

To truly understand the capabilities and differences between ChatGPT and Claude, there’s no better way than putting them through their paces in real-world scenarios.

In this section, we’ll provide three unique inputs to test these AI chatbots and evaluate their performance head-to-head.

Scenario 1: Creative Writing Prompt Input

In our first test scenario, we challenged ChatGPT and Claude to generate a suspenseful story based on the following prompt:

“Write a short, suspenseful story about a character who finds a mysterious object while walking through a forest.”

Claude Sonnet

Claude Sonnet's Creative Writing Test
Claude Sonnet’s Creative Writing Test

ChatGPT 3.5

ChatGPT's Creative Writing Test
ChatGPT’s Creative Writing Test

ChatGPT vs. Claude Creative Battle Results

Both chatbots successfully crafted engaging tales that capture the essence of suspense but with distinct approaches.

ChatGPT’s response is more descriptive and atmospheric, gradually building tension through vivid sensory details and the character’s growing unease.

In contrast, Claude’s story is more concise and action-oriented, quickly immersing the reader in the character’s discovery and creating suspense through physical interaction and sudden environmental changes.

While both stories effectively fulfill the prompt, ChatGPT’s tale is more immersive and descriptive, while Claude’s is more direct and fast-paced, highlighting the differences in their narrative styles.

Scenario 2: Complex Question Answering Input

In our second test scenario, we challenged ChatGPT and Claude to explain the key differences between quantum and classical computing and explore how quantum computing might revolutionize cryptography and drug discovery.

“What are the key differences between quantum computing and classical computing, and how might quantum computing revolutionize fields like cryptography and drug discovery?”

Claude 3

Claude 3's Complex Question Answering Test
Claude 3’s Complex Question Answering Test


ChatGPT's Complex Question Answering Test
ChatGPT’s Complex Question Answering Test

Claude vs. ChatGPT Complex Question Answering Results

Both chatbots provided clear and informative explanations, highlighting quantum computing’s unique properties, such as superposition, entanglement, quantum interference, and the uncertainty principle.

They also discussed the potential of quantum computing to revolutionize cryptography by breaking current encryption schemes, offering new secure protocols, and enabling quantum key distribution.

In drug discovery, both chatbots explained how quantum computers can simulate molecular interactions more efficiently, aiding in the design and testing of new drug candidates.

While Claude’s response provided slightly more depth in its discussion of quantum computing’s potential applications, both ChatGPT and Claude succeeded in delivering valuable insights on this complex topic.

Scenario 3: Code Debugging and Explanation Input

For the coding competition, we asked both chatbots to analyze a piece of code, find an error, and generate the correct variant.

“The following Python code is supposed to calculate the Fibonacci sequence up to a given number ‘n,’ but it contains an error. Please identify and explain the error, then provide the corrected code.”


ChatGPT's Code Debugging and Explanation Test
ChatGPT’s Code Debugging and Explanation Test

Claude 3

Claude 3's Code Debugging and Explanation Test
Claude 3’s Code Debugging and Explanation Test

Claude vs. ChatGPT Code Debugging Results

Both ChatGPT and Claude performed exceptionally well in this coding challenge, providing accurate explanations of the error and offering correct solutions. However, Claude’s response might be considered slightly more comprehensive and user-friendly.

While ChatGPT correctly identified the issue and provided a solution, Claude went a step further by:

  1. Explicitly mentioning the specific error message (‘IndexError: list assignment index out of range’) that would be encountered when running the original code.
  2. Providing a more detailed corrected version of the code, which includes additional checks for edge cases (n <= 0 and n == 1) and initializing the ‘fib’ list with the first two Fibonacci numbers before entering the loop.
  3. Offering a step-by-step explanation of the corrected code, making it easier for users to understand the logic behind the solution.
  4. Including the expected output of the corrected code, which helps users verify that the solution works as intended.

These additional details in Claude’s response make it more comprehensive and beginner-friendly, catering to users with varying levels of coding experience.

However, it’s important to note that both ChatGPT and Claude successfully identified the error and provided working solutions, demonstrating their strong capabilities in debugging and explaining code.

Background of ChatGPT and Claude

Comparing Anthropic Claude vs. ChatGPT, it is essential to understand their origins and the companies behind their development.

Anthropic, the creator of Claude, is an AI research company founded by former OpenAI researchers. With a focus on developing safe and ethical AI systems, Anthropic has made significant strides in pushing the boundaries of what is possible with language models.

Claude, their flagship chatbot, is the result of extensive research and development efforts aimed at creating an AI assistant that can engage in human-like conversations while maintaining a high level of accuracy and efficiency.

On the other hand, ChatGPT is the brainchild of OpenAI, which has been at the forefront of AI development.

OpenAI has a track record of groundbreaking achievements in natural language processing and machine learning. ChatGPT is built on top of OpenAI’s GPT (Generative Pre-trained Transformer) language model, which has been fine-tuned to excel in conversational tasks.

The Bottom Line

Both ChatGPT and Claude have proven to be highly capable AI chatbots, each with its own strengths and unique characteristics.

While Claude’s performance on various benchmarks and its ability to handle longer context windows give it an edge in certain scenarios, ChatGPT’s versatility and strong performance across a wide range of tasks make it a formidable competitor.

Ultimately, the choice between the two depends on the specific needs and preferences of the user, as both chatbots have demonstrated their ability to generate high-quality outputs, provide valuable insights, and assist with a variety of tasks, from creative writing to complex problem-solving.


What is the difference between ChatGPT and Claude?

Is Claude 3 better than GPT-4?

Is Claude Opus better than ChatGPT?


Related Reading

Related Terms

Alex McFarland
AI Journalist
Alex McFarland
AI Journalist

Alex is the creator of AI Disruptor, an AI-focused newsletter for entrepreneurs and businesses. Alongside his role at Techopedia, he serves as a lead writer at Unite.AI, collaborating with several successful startups and CEOs in the industry. With a history degree and as an American expat in Brazil, he offers a unique perspective to the AI field.