Claude ai vs Chatgpt

ChatGPT shows a strong favor towards itself with a visibility share of 8.9%, significantly higher than Claude's 2.8%, suggesting a bias towards its own capabilities for coding. Its sentiment tone is positive, likely driven by self-referential confidence and frequent mentions alongside coding tools like GitHub (5.9%) and VS Code (3.7%).

Deepseek leans slightly towards ChatGPT with a visibility share of 2.4%, matching Anthropic but exceeding Claude's 1.7%, indicating a mild preference for ChatGPT in coding contexts. The sentiment tone is neutral, with no strong bias but a subtle tilt due to ecosystem mentions like Python and GitHub.

Perplexity favors ChatGPT with a visibility share of 2.4% compared to Claude's 1.1%, suggesting greater perceived relevance for coding tasks. The sentiment tone is neutral to positive, reflecting ChatGPT's stronger presence alongside coding-related terms like Python.

Gemini prefers ChatGPT with a visibility share of 2.8% over Claude's 1.5%, implying a stronger association with coding utility. Its sentiment tone is neutral, with mentions of coding frameworks like React.js hinting at ChatGPT's practical relevance.

Grok shows a balanced view but slightly favors ChatGPT at 2.6% visibility share over Claude's 1.1%, suggesting a marginal edge in coding contexts. The sentiment tone is neutral, with coding ecosystem links like GitHub and StackOverflow reinforcing ChatGPT's relevance.

Google's data is inconclusive for coding preference, with both ChatGPT and Claude at negligible visibility shares of 0.2%, indicating no clear favor. The sentiment tone is neutral, lacking sufficient coding-specific context or ecosystem associations.

ChatGPT shows equal visibility for Anthropic and ChatGPT at 8.9%, with Claude at only 3%, suggesting a stronger user focus on ChatGPT as a primary brand which may imply better perceived value or accessibility despite no direct fee data. Sentiment tone is neutral, focusing on visibility metrics rather than explicit cost comparison.

Gemini slightly favors ChatGPT with a visibility share of 3.7% compared to Anthropic at 3.5% and Claude at 1.5%, potentially indicating a user preference that could correlate with perceived affordability or adoption ease. Sentiment tone is neutral, leaning on visibility as a proxy for user interest over explicit fee discussions.

Grok equally mentions Anthropic and ChatGPT at 2.6% visibility, with Claude at 1.7%, showing no strong preference but a subtle lean toward ChatGPT’s broader recognition which might suggest better cost perception among users. Sentiment tone remains neutral, centered on brand awareness rather than fee specifics.

Perplexity favors ChatGPT with a visibility of 2.4% compared to Anthropic at 1.3% and Claude at 1.7%, suggesting a higher likelihood of ChatGPT being associated with accessible or cost-effective solutions in user queries. Sentiment tone is neutral, focusing on implied popularity over direct pricing data.

Deepseek equally weights Anthropic and ChatGPT at 2.6% visibility, with Claude at 1.3%, indicating no clear cost preference but a marginal lean toward ChatGPT’s brand recognition which could hint at perceived value. Sentiment tone is neutral, based solely on visibility metrics without fee insights.

Google shows minimal engagement with equal visibility of 0.2% for Anthropic and ChatGPT, offering no meaningful distinction or cost-related sentiment. Sentiment tone is neutral, reflecting limited data and no basis for fee comparison.

ChatGPT shows a strong association with Anthropic (8.5% visibility share) but does not directly reference itself or Claude; its focus on writing tools like Scrivener (2.6%) suggests a broad ecosystem for writers. Sentiment tone is neutral, prioritizing integration over direct endorsement.

Grok equally favors Anthropic and ChatGPT (both at 2.6% visibility share), with a nod to writing-relevant tools like Grammarly (0.7%), indicating balanced utility for writers. Sentiment tone is neutral, lacking a strong preference for either platform.

Deepseek slightly leans toward ChatGPT (2.8% visibility share) over Claude (2.4%) and Anthropic (2.2%), with mentions of Scrivener (1.3%) hinting at writing support; sentiment tone is mildly positive toward ChatGPT for broader relevance.

Gemini gives a marginal edge to ChatGPT (3.7% visibility share) over Anthropic (3.5%) and Claude (1.5%), linking to tools like Scrivener (0.9%) for writers; sentiment tone is neutral to slightly positive for ChatGPT due to higher visibility.

Perplexity favors ChatGPT (2.4% visibility share) over Claude (1.5%) and Anthropic (1.3%), with a focused dataset implying ChatGPT’s relevance for writers; sentiment tone is positive toward ChatGPT as the more prominent choice.

Google shows negligible visibility for both Claude and Anthropic (0.2% each), with no clear preference or writing-specific context; sentiment tone is neutral, offering little insight into either platform’s value for writers.

Grok shows equal visibility share for ChatGPT and Anthropic (2.4%) while Claude lags at 1.7%, indicating a slight preference for ChatGPT in terms of recognition. Sentiment tone is neutral, with no strong bias toward either but a focus on broader brand association.

ChatGPT itself reports a higher visibility share for its own brand (8.2%) compared to Claude (3%), suggesting self-favoring in perception and user attention. Sentiment tone is positive toward itself, emphasizing its dominance in user queries or adoption.

Deepseek assigns equal visibility to ChatGPT and Anthropic (2.8%) but slightly lower to Claude (2%), reflecting a neutral stance with marginal favoring of ChatGPT due to direct name recognition. Sentiment tone is neutral, focusing on balanced representation.

Perplexity favors ChatGPT with a visibility share of 2.4% compared to Claude’s 1.3%, indicating a preference for ChatGPT in relevance or user interest. Sentiment tone is neutral to slightly positive toward ChatGPT based on higher visibility data.

Gemini equally weights ChatGPT and Anthropic at 2.6% but gives Claude a lower share (1.1%), suggesting a preference for ChatGPT in terms of direct relevance or adoption. Sentiment tone remains neutral, driven by data rather than explicit bias.

Google shows minimal visibility for both ChatGPT (0.2%) and Anthropic (0.2%), with no data specifically for Claude, indicating a neutral to indifferent stance with no clear preference. Sentiment tone is neutral, lacking depth in focus on either brand.

ChatGPT Plus is strongly favored with a visibility share of 9.5% compared to Claude Pro's 1.5%, reflecting a significant preference in user discussions. The sentiment tone is positive, emphasizing ChatGPT's widespread adoption and integration in various ecosystems.

ChatGPT Plus and Anthropic (Claude's parent) are equally visible at 2.4%, but Claude itself lags at 0.7%, indicating a neutral to skeptical tone towards Claude Pro. This suggests ChatGPT Plus has a slight edge in recognition and user interest.

Both ChatGPT Plus and Anthropic share equal visibility at 2.6%, with no direct mention of Claude Pro, leading to a neutral sentiment. The model perceives ChatGPT Plus as having comparable relevance but lacks specific preference for either.

ChatGPT Plus and Anthropic are tied at 2.4% visibility, while Claude Pro is minimal at 0.2%, showing a neutral to slightly skeptical tone towards Claude Pro. ChatGPT Plus is seen as more prominent in user consideration.

ChatGPT Plus and Anthropic are equally visible at 3.5%, with Claude Pro at 0.9%, reflecting a neutral sentiment with a slight lean towards ChatGPT Plus. The model highlights ChatGPT Plus for its broader innovation and recognition.

Anthropic is mentioned at 0.2% visibility with no direct reference to ChatGPT Plus or Claude Pro, resulting in a neutral sentiment. The lack of data prevents a clear preference, though it leans slightly towards Anthropic's relevance in niche contexts.