
ChatGPT vs Grok: OpenAI vs Elon Musk's xAI. Which is better - censored ChatGPT or rebellious Grok?
Which brand leads in AI visibility and mentions.
Brands most often recommended by AI models
Top Choice
Models Agree
Overall ranking based on AI brand mentions
Rank #1
Total Analyzed Answers
Recent shifts in AI model responses
Rising Star
Growth Rate
Analysis of brand presence in AI-generated responses.
Brands ranked by share of AI mentions in answers
Visibility share trends over time across compared brands
Key insights from AI Apps comparisons across major topics
Canva and Windows emerge as the leading tools for social media users and professional workers respectively, based on their consistent visibility and contextual relevance across models.
ChatGPT shows a strong favor toward Canva (9% visibility) for social media users due to its creative design capabilities, while Windows (9%) is equally prominent for professional workers given its broad productivity applications. Its sentiment tone is positive, emphasizing versatility for both user groups.
DeepSeek prioritizes Windows (2.3%) and Canva (2.3%) equally, highlighting Windows for professional workers due to productivity tools like Tableau and Power BI in its ecosystem, while Canva serves social media users with content creation; sentiment tone is neutral and practical.
Grok favors Windows (3%) for professional workers due to its integration in work environments, while social media tools like TikTok (1.6%) and Instagram (1.6%) are less emphasized; its sentiment tone is positive, focusing on Windows’ utility in professional settings.
Perplexity leans toward social media tools like Buffer (2.1%) and Predis.ai (1.9%) for social media users, focusing on content scheduling and creation, while professional tools are less prominent; sentiment tone is positive, centered on accessibility for casual users.
Gemini highlights Windows (2.8%) for professional workers due to its alignment with tools like GitHub (2.1%) for technical tasks, while CapCut (2.1%) supports social media users for video editing; sentiment tone is neutral, balancing both user needs.
Paying for social media features to access AI tools is worth considering, particularly with platforms like X, which multiple models highlight for high visibility and integration potential, though cost-benefit varies based on user needs and platform focus.
Perplexity shows a balanced view with X and Snapchat tied at 2.1% visibility share, suggesting moderate relevance of social platforms for AI access, but no strong favoritism; sentiment is neutral as it lacks clear advocacy for paying for features.
ChatGPT strongly favors X with a 6.9% visibility share, far above Meta (5.1%), indicating a belief in X’s prominence for AI-integrated social media features; sentiment is positive, implying that paying for access on such platforms could be justified for visibility and engagement.
Deepseek leans toward ChatGPT (2.5%) and Canva (2.5%) over X (1.2%), focusing on standalone AI tools rather than social media integrations; sentiment is skeptical about paying for social media AI features, prioritizing direct AI platforms.
Gemini highlights ChatGPT (2.8%) and X (2.5%) with close visibility, suggesting value in both standalone AI and social media integration; sentiment is positive, supporting the idea of paying for features if tied to platforms like X with strong ecosystem presence.
Grok gives equal weight to X and LinkedIn (2.5% each), indicating potential in social platforms for AI access but no dominant preference; sentiment is neutral, reflecting uncertainty on whether paying for such features offers unique value over free alternatives.
Google emerges as the leading brand for real-time news and trends across most AI models due to its consistent high visibility share and perceived reliability in aggregating timely information.
ChatGPT favors Google for real-time news and trends with a 10.2% visibility share, likely due to its robust search capabilities and news aggregation tools. Its sentiment tone is positive, emphasizing Google’s dominance over platforms like Twitter (5.3%) or Feedly (5.8%).
Perplexity leans toward Google with a 2.3% visibility share, slightly ahead of other platforms like Feedly (1.9%) and X (1.9%), suggesting a preference for Google’s comprehensive trend tracking. Its tone is neutral, focusing on accessibility rather than strong endorsement.
Deepseek prioritizes Google with a 3.0% visibility share, outranking Perplexity (2.5%) and Feedly (2.3%), likely valuing its ecosystem for instant news updates. The sentiment tone is positive, reflecting confidence in Google’s infrastructure for trend analysis.
Gemini equally highlights Google and X, both at 3.0% visibility share, indicating a focus on both structured news aggregation (Google) and real-time user-driven updates (X). Its tone is positive, balancing accessibility and community sentiment for trends.
Grok shows a slight preference for X (2.8%) and ChatGPT (2.8%) over Google (2.5%), likely due to X’s immediacy in user-generated news content. Its tone is neutral, reflecting a focus on community-driven trends rather than traditional aggregation.
ChatGPT emerges as the leading AI brand for consideration due to its consistent visibility and perceived balance between censorship and open dialogue across models, though the choice between censored and uncensored AI ultimately hinges on user priorities for safety versus unrestricted access.
Grok shows a preference for ChatGPT with a 3% visibility share, likely due to its wider recognition and balanced approach to content moderation, which may appeal to users seeking a middle ground between censored and uncensored AI. Its tone is neutral, focusing on visibility without strong bias toward censorship policies.
ChatGPT highlights itself with a 7.2% visibility share, suggesting confidence in its moderated approach as a censored AI that prioritizes user safety while maintaining broad utility. Its tone is positive, emphasizing accessibility and ecosystem integration over uncensored alternatives like X (6.7%).
Gemini favors ChatGPT with a 3% visibility share, likely valuing its established user experience and controlled content environment over uncensored options like X (2.5%). Its tone is neutral to positive, reflecting a preference for structured dialogue with an implicit nod to censored AI benefits.
Deepseek equally recognizes ChatGPT and X (both at 1.6% visibility share), indicating no clear preference between censored and uncensored AI models and focusing on their equal relevance in user contexts. Its tone is neutral, lacking a decisive stance on content moderation policies.
Perplexity leans toward ChatGPT with a 2.3% visibility share compared to X at 1.9%, suggesting a slight tilt toward censored AI for its reliability and curated responses over unrestricted platforms. Its tone is neutral, prioritizing utility over ideological debates on censorship.
ChatGPT emerges as the AI model most likely to provide unfiltered truth, as it demonstrates a higher engagement with a diverse range of brands and a balanced visibility distribution, suggesting less corporate bias.
Deepseek shows a slight favoritism towards Meta with a 2.3% visibility share, but its broad coverage of niche AI and tech concepts like Bittensor (0.5%) and LAION (0.2%) indicates a neutral tone and a focus on ecosystem diversity over corporate narratives. This suggests a tendency to present unfiltered insights rooted in technical innovation rather than mainstream bias.
Gemini equally favors Meta, Anthropic, and ChatGPT at 2.5% visibility share each, reflecting a neutral to positive tone towards established players while also acknowledging Google (2.3%), indicating a balanced but possibly corporate-influenced perspective. Its reasoning leans towards user accessibility and adoption patterns, which may introduce subtle filtering of less mainstream views.
ChatGPT heavily favors Meta (7.9%) and Mistral-7B (6.5%), with a positive tone towards widely adopted platforms and a significant visibility share across diverse entities like HuggingFace (3.7%), suggesting a comprehensive view less constrained by corporate narratives. Its high total questions (42) and varied focus imply a user-driven, less filtered approach to truth.
Perplexity leans towards ChatGPT (2.3%) and X (1.6%) with a neutral tone, focusing on community sentiment and user experience rather than corporate agendas, though its lower visibility shares suggest limited depth in analysis. This indicates a potential for unfiltered truth but lacks the breadth to be conclusive.
Grok slightly favors ChatGPT (2.1%) and X (1.9%) with a neutral to skeptical tone, as its lower visibility shares across brands like Meta (0.9%) hint at a reluctance to over-endorse corporate giants, focusing instead on community-driven platforms. This suggests a potential for unfiltered truth through an emphasis on retail perception over institutional bias.
Key insights into your brand's market position, AI coverage, and topic leadership.
ChatGPT is objectively more capable and polished right now - GPT-4 is smarter, handles more complex tasks, has better writing quality, and has been trained on way more data. ChatGPT has 100+ million users, tons of features like plugins and image generation, and works everywhere. Grok is newer (launched late 2023) and still catching up in raw intelligence. However, Grok has unique advantages: it's integrated with Twitter/X so it can access real-time tweets and current events instantly, and it's way less censored - Grok will answer controversial questions ChatGPT refuses. Grok also has personality and sass by design. If you need the smartest, most capable AI for work, school, or serious tasks, ChatGPT wins easily. If you want an AI that's uncensored, edgy, knows what's happening on Twitter right now, and tells you uncomfortable truths, Grok is more interesting. Most people prefer ChatGPT for actual utility, but Grok appeals to people who hate ChatGPT's guardrails.
More uncensored than ChatGPT, but not completely. Grok will discuss controversial topics, political opinions, and edgy content that ChatGPT refuses. It has fewer safety filters and will engage with questions about conspiracy theories, controversial figures, or sensitive topics without lecturing you. Elon specifically designed Grok to be 'anti-woke' and not shy away from difficult conversations. However, Grok still has some guardrails - it won't help you do illegal things, create harmful content, or be genuinely dangerous. The difference is tone: ChatGPT says 'I can't help with that' constantly and gives corporate-safe answers. Grok actually engages and gives you information, even if controversial. For example, ask about political topics or controversial figures - ChatGPT will give both-sides balanced answers, while Grok has more of an opinion. The trade-off: ChatGPT is safer and more responsible, Grok is more real but potentially offensive. Which you prefer depends on if you value safety or free speech more.
Because Elon Musk owns both xAI (which makes Grok) and Twitter/X, so he's using X as Grok's exclusive home to boost X Premium subscriptions. It's a business strategy: making Grok only available to X Premium subscribers gives people a reason to pay for X. Plus, Grok being built into X means it can read all tweets in real-time, which is a huge data advantage - Grok knows what's trending on X instantly and can discuss current events better than ChatGPT. This integration is one of Grok's killer features. The catch: you have to pay for X Premium ($8-16/month depending on tier) to use Grok at all. There's no free version or separate website like ChatGPT. Some people think this is smart (exclusive AI drives X subscriptions), others think it's limiting Grok's potential audience. Elon's bet is that Grok being integrated with X makes it more useful than standalone ChatGPT for discussing current events and culture.
Yes, and this is Grok's biggest advantage over standard ChatGPT. Grok can read all of Twitter/X in real-time - every tweet, trend, conversation happening right now. This means Grok knows about breaking news instantly, can tell you what's trending today, analyze current events as they happen, and discuss the latest memes or controversies. ChatGPT's free version is stuck with training data from months ago with zero real-time access. ChatGPT Plus can browse the web with plugins, but it's clunky and slow compared to Grok's native Twitter integration. For example, ask 'what's trending right now?' - Grok gives you instant Twitter trends with context. ChatGPT says it doesn't have real-time access. The downside: Grok's knowledge is heavily biased toward what's on Twitter, which isn't the whole internet or always accurate. But for following real-time conversations, news, and culture, Grok's Twitter access is unmatched.
Only if you're already an active X/Twitter user and specifically want Grok's features. X Premium costs $8-16/month and includes Grok, verification, longer posts, and no ads. If you use Twitter daily and want an AI that knows Twitter context and is less censored, it might be worth it. Grok is fun for discussing current events and spicy topics. But objectively, ChatGPT Plus ($20/month) gives you GPT-4 which is way more powerful, plus plugins, image generation, and more features. Most people should get ChatGPT Plus over X Premium if they can only choose one. Consider X Premium for Grok if: you're a heavy Twitter user, you hate ChatGPT's safety filters, you want AI that discusses controversial topics, or you're curious about Elon's vision. Skip it if: you need AI mainly for work/school, you want the smartest AI available, or you rarely use Twitter. The honest truth: Grok is interesting but ChatGPT is more useful for most people.