Benchmarks are useless. They'll tell you one model scores 2% higher on some test nobody cares about. What they won't tell you is which model will actually help you get work done.
I use both Claude and GPT-4 daily for real work. Here's what I've learned.
The Quick Answer
Use Claude for: Long documents, nuanced writing, code that needs to work first try, anything requiring careful reasoning.
Use GPT-4 for: Quick tasks, brainstorming, broad knowledge questions, when you need plugins/browsing/DALL-E.
Now let's get into the details.
Head-to-Head Comparison
| Task | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | GPT-4 Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| Coding | Better first-try accuracy | Good but more debugging needed |
| Long Documents | 200K context, maintains coherence | 128K context, tends to drift |
| Writing Style | More natural, less robotic | Tends toward corporate speak |
| Following Instructions | Excellent, fewer workarounds needed | Good but sometimes ignores constraints |
| Speed | Fast | Slightly faster |
| Ecosystem | API, Artifacts, Projects | Plugins, DALL-E, browsing, GPTs |
| Price | $3/$15 per million tokens | $10/$30 per million tokens |
Where Claude Wins Decisively
1. Coding
Claude 3.5 Sonnet is the best coding model available right now. It's not close. Code works on the first try more often, edge cases are handled better, and the explanations actually help you understand what's happening.
I've switched all my coding workflows to Claude and my debugging time dropped by probably 40%.
2. Long-Form Content
Claude's 200K context window is real—it actually uses all of it. GPT-4 has 128K but starts losing the plot around 50K tokens in practice.
If you're working with long documents, research, or multi-file codebases, Claude is the only choice.
3. Not Being Annoying
This sounds petty but it matters: Claude doesn't lecture you. GPT-4 constantly adds disclaimers, refuses reasonable requests, and hedges everything with "As an AI language model..."
Claude just... helps. It's refreshing.
Where GPT-4 Wins
1. Ecosystem
OpenAI's plugin ecosystem is unmatched. Need to browse the web, generate images, run code, or use a custom GPT someone built? That's GPT-4's territory.
2. Broad Knowledge
For trivia, general knowledge, and "I vaguely remember reading about..." questions, GPT-4 seems to have slightly broader training data. The difference is small but noticeable.
3. Speed for Simple Tasks
For quick, simple queries, GPT-4 is marginally faster to first token. If you're doing high-volume simple tasks, this adds up.
💡 Pro tip: Use both. Claude for heavy lifting, GPT-4 for quick tasks and when you need the ecosystem. That's what the pros do.
What About the Others?
Gemini Pro
Good but not great at anything. Jack of all trades, master of none. Free tier is generous though.
Llama 3
Best open-source option. Great if you need to self-host or want to avoid API dependencies. Not quite Claude/GPT-4 level for complex tasks.
Mistral
Fast and cheap. Good for high-volume, simpler tasks where you can tolerate some quality drop.
My Actual Setup
- Primary: Claude 3.5 Sonnet for coding, writing, analysis, and anything requiring careful thought
- Secondary: GPT-4 for quick questions, brainstorming, and when I need plugins
- Local: Llama 3 70B for sensitive work I don't want going to an API
Total cost: ~$40/month for heavy daily use. Worth every penny.
The Bottom Line
If you can only pick one: Claude 3.5 Sonnet. It's better at the things that matter for getting real work done.
If you can use both: Do that. They complement each other well.
If you're still using GPT-3.5 or free tiers only: You're leaving massive productivity gains on the table. The $20/month for Claude Pro or ChatGPT Plus pays for itself in the first hour of saved work.
More AI Insights Weekly
Get practical comparisons, tool reviews, and no-BS takes on AI.
Subscribe Free →