I much prefer Claude over ChatGPT, based on my experience using both extensively. Claude understands me significantly better and seems to "know" my intentions with much greater ease. For example, when I request the full file, it provides it without any issues or unnecessary reiterations (ChatGPT fails after me repeatedly instructing it to), often confirming my request with a brief summary beforehand, but nothing more. Additionally, Claude frequently asks clarifying questions to better understand my goals, something I have noticed ChatGPT never did. I have found it quite amazing that it does that.

So... as long as this money helps them improve their LLM even more, I am all up for it.

My main issue is quickly being rate-limited in relatively long chats, making me wait 4 hours despite having a subscription for Pro. Recently I have noticed some other related issues, too. More money could help with these issues, too.

To the developers: keep up the excellent work and may you continue striving for improvement. I feel like ChatGPT is worse now than it was half a year ago, I hope this will not happen to Claude.

Claude also more readily corrects me or answers "no" to a question (when the answer should be "no").

I've started to notice that GPT-* vs. Claude is quite domain (and even subdomain) specific.

For programming, when using languages like C, python, ruby, C#, and JS, both seemed fairly comparable to me. However, I was astounded at how awful Claude was at Swift. Most of what I would get from Claude wouldn't even compile, contained standard library methods that did not exist, and so on. For whatever reason, GPT is night and day better in this regard.

In fact, I found GPT to be the best resource for less common languages like Applescript. Of course, GPT is not always correct on the first `n` number of tries, but with enough back-and-forth debugging, GPT really has pulled through for me.

I've also found GPT to be better at math and grammar, but only the more advanced models like O1-preview. I do agree with you too that Claude is better in a conversational sense. I have found it to be more empathetic and personable than GPT.

I just use the API (well, via Openrouter) together with custom frontends like Open WebUI. No rate limiting issues then, and I can super easily switch models even in an existing conversation. Though I guess I do miss a few bells & whistles from the proprietary chat interfaces.

Speaking of ChatGPT getting worse over time, it would be interesting to see ChatGPT be benchmarked continuously to see how it performs over time (and the results published somewhere publically).

Even local variations would be interesting

For long chats, I suggest exporting any artifacts, asking Claude to summarize the chat and put the artifacts and summarization in a project. There's no need to stuff Claude's context windows, especially if you tend to ask a lot of explanation-type questions like I do.

I've also read some people get around rate limits using the API through OpenRouter, and I'm sure you could hook a document store around that easily, but the Claude UI is low-friction

This matches my experience but the one reason why I use Claude more than ChatGPT currently is that Claude is available.

I pay for both but only for ChatGPT I permanently exceed my limit and I have to wait four days. Who does that? I pay you for your setvice, so block me for an hour if you absolutely must, but multiple days, honestly - no.

Well they better know how to reduce their request-response latency since there are multiple reports of users not being able to use Claude at high load.

With all those billions and these engineers, I'd expect a level of service that doesn't struggle over at Google-level scale.

Unbelievable.