Alexis Kestler
As someone who spends my days immersed in the fascinating world of AI as a data analyst and GPT expert, I was eager to pit the two hottest generative AI systems against each other – Google‘s newly announced Bard and OpenAI‘s much-hyped ChatGPT.
After putting Bard and ChatGPT through their paces on 9 different prompts, I believe ChatGPT still comes out on top in most areas. However, Bard shows potential once Google refines and expands its capabilities.
Here‘s my comprehensive breakdown as a tech geek of how these two titans compare across key criteria:
Creativity
For creative writing prompts, such as crafting a fictional story or composing poetry, ChatGPT‘s advanced natural language skills give it a clear edge. While Bard tends to rehash clichés and stray off topic, ChatGPT conjures vivid imagery and weaves cohesive narratives with ease.
In one 50-word story prompt, ChatGPT deftly incorporated original details about minerals traded for mangoes that Bard lacked. And ChatGPT‘s chilling poem from the perspective of an evil robot was far more artful than Bard‘s pedestrian recap of the prompt.
Winner: ChatGPT
Coding abilities
As expected, both tools can generate functioning code for simple programs. Bard‘s calculator code was more user-friendly by prompting to continue after each operation. However, upon further testing I found that ChatGPT‘s code was more sound.
For example, ChatGPT handled division by zero errors that would crash Bard‘s program. This speaks to stronger logical reasoning capabilities. For now, ChatGPT appears better equipped for coding tasks.
Email writing
Based on my tests, ChatGPT is superior at crafting professional correspondence. When asked to write a payment reminder email, Bard jumped straight to threats of legal action that were overly aggressive for a first notice.
Meanwhile, ChatGPT composed an email with the appropriate mix of urgency and politeness. The clarity and tact exhibited here highlights ChatGPT‘s more nuanced language mastery.
Accuracy
For retrieving straightforward factual information, Bard‘s tight integration with Google search gives it an advantage, but this can be a double-edged sword.
When I asked for FIFA World Cup data, Bard fabricated details about historic Golden Ball winners – an alarming failure of accuracy. ChatGPT smartly omitted Golden Ball info pre-1982 when the award debuted.
Yes, ChatGPT‘s knowledge cut-off in 2021 caused it to miss some recent World Cup details. However, providing fully fabricated "facts" is far more dangerous than omissions in my view as an AI expert. This could severely damage Bard‘s credibility.
Explanation Ability
In response to a request for gaming laptop buying tips, ChatGPT once again demonstrated stronger reasoning skills. Every suggestion it provided was accompanied by clear explanations tied to key gaming considerations like GPU power, display resolution, and refresh rates.
Meanwhile, Bard‘s recommendations seemed arbitrarily plucked from Google search results, with no context on why they were suitable for gaming. The justification matters just as much as the information itself.
Creativity in Language Use
Bard fell short on creative language use prompts. When asked to poetically express an evil robot‘s sinister plans, ChatGPT spun an ominous rhyming poem with slick alliterations. Bard simply parroted back the premise without imagination.
Likewise, for a weekend trip itinerary, ChatGPT provided lively descriptive details of LA activities. Bard was far more clinical, relying on bare listings cribbed from search.
ChatGPT shows far greater linguistic range – it can capture emotional and conceptual nuances beyond the strictly informational.
Customization Ability
A key criteria for helpful AI is tailoring outputs to individual users‘ needs. When generating a snake expedition checklist, ChatGPT included context-specific precautions like avoiding night hikes and wearing protective clothing that Bard missed.
The checklist felt personalized to the hazardous scenario I described, vs. Bard‘s generic warnings against swimming and noise that could apply to any nature outing. ChatGPT wins for situational awareness here.
Data Summary
Here‘s a breakdown of how many wins each AI achieved across the 9 comparisons:
| Category | Winner |
|---|---|
| Creativity | ChatGPT |
| Coding | ChatGPT |
| Emails | ChatGPT |
| Accuracy | ChatGPT |
| Explanations | ChatGPT |
| Language Use | ChatGPT |
| Customization | ChatGPT |
| Total | ChatGPT: 7 |
| Bard: 1 |
The Verdict
As a tech enthusiast fascinated by the progress of generative AI, I was thrilled to get such early access to Google‘s new Bard system. However, its limitations quickly became apparent in head-to-head testing across a diverse range of conversational prompts.
In its current state, ChatGPT simply demonstrates far stronger natural language processing capabilities compared to Bard. Though Bard shows promise harnessing Google‘s vast knowledge, the lack of reasoning and creative expression severely hampers its utility.
But this is only Bard‘s initial beta phase – with further development time, resources, and training data, Google could rapidly close the gap. And integrating Bard directly into Google Search could make it a formidable ChatGPT rival.
For now though, ChatGPT remains state-of-the-art in user-friendly generative AI. Its remarkable linguistic dexterity and knowledge make it my go-to tool when I need a conversational assistant. But I‘ll be keeping a close eye on Bard‘s progress – the AI race is heating up!
Let me know if you have any other questions about how these amazing systems compare. I‘m happy to chat more and share additional insights from my expertise in natural language AI technology. Comparing the strengths and weaknesses of rapidly evolving tools like these is a never-ending learning process!
