The great AI showdown: GPT-4o vs Gemini 1.5 Pro. Last week, OpenAI and Google showcased their latest generative AI models in a highly anticipated showdown. OpenAI’s Spring Update and Google’s annual I/O developer conference revealed updates to their respective AI models Gemini 1.5 Pro, sparking a new wave of excitement and comparisons in the tech world.

The jargon can get overwhelming—tokens, parameters, context windows—but understanding the differences between these models, and others like them, is crucial for users deciding which AI assistant to rely on.

GPT-4o vs Gemini 1.5 Pro: Understanding the Differences

Both are advanced language models engineered to understand and generate human-like text based on prompts. However, their responses and integrations differ significantly.

Integration and Pricing

• GPT-4o: Integrates seamlessly with Microsoft products but also functions independently.
• Gemini 1.5 Pro: Designed specifically for Google’s ecosystem.

Both models offer free versions and subscription services—ChatGPT Plus and Gemini Advanced—each priced at $20 per month, providing access to the latest features and enhancements.

Context Windows

Google announced a significant expansion for Gemini 1.5 Pro’s context window, now at 1 million tokens, with plans to double it by the end of the year. In comparison, GPT-4o maintains a 128,000-token context window, the same as its predecessor, GPT-4.

What is a context window?

The context window determines how much text the model can consider at once, similar to its memory span. A larger context window means the model can remember more from previous interactions and process larger chunks of information, whether text, video, audio, or code. This gives Gemini a notable advantage in handling extensive inputs.

Parameters

Neither OpenAI nor Google disclose the exact parameters of their models. Parameters are like the neurons in a brain—the more there are, the more complex and accurate the model’s responses can be. GPT-4 reportedly uses 1.8 trillion parameters, but the specifics for GPT-4o remain unclear. Google’s estimates range from 1.6 trillion to 175 trillion parameters.

Information Access

Gemini’s internet connectivity initially gave it an edge over GPT-3.5, allowing it to pull up-to-date information. However, OpenAI’s deals with Reddit and News Corp to incorporate recent data levels the playing field. GPT-4o’s knowledge cutoff is October 2023, whereas Gemini’s is “early 2023,” but both models continuously update their databases.

Language Support

GPT-4o is available in 50 languages, surpassing Gemini 1.5 Pro’s 35 languages. However, Google’s extensive experience with Google Translate suggests Gemini has a robust foundation for multilingual capabilities.

Conversational Interfaces

Both models are now more interactive. GPT-4o introduces a new interface for talking to the chatbot, sharing live video, and detecting user emotions. Similarly, Google’s Gemini Live offers conversational abilities, allowing users to interrupt and interact dynamically.

1. Coding Test

Coding prowess stands as a fundamental benchmark for evaluating AI’s problem-solving abilities. We initiated our examination with a challenging task: solving the Travelling Salesman Problem using Python. This intricate problem, often encountered in technical interviews, demands strategic thinking and algorithmic proficiency.

Both Gemini 1.5 Pro and GPT-4o delivered well-structured code snippets, accompanied by insightful comments and example usage. However, Gemini 1.5 Pro distinguished itself by providing a comprehensive explanation, covering code analytics, runtime considerations, and potential applications. In contrast, GPT-4o offered a concise yet effective explanation, reflecting its precise approach to problem-solving.

2. Tricky Math Problem Test

Delving into the realm of mathematics, we presented both AI models with a perplexing aptitude problem. The task was to decipher a pattern where numerical values corresponded to the number of digits in each number.

While Gemini 1.5 Pro adeptly discerned the pattern and provided a correct solution with a clear explanation, GPT-4o struggled to grasp the problem’s essence. Its response meandered, failing to deliver the correct answer and lacking coherence. Thus, Gemini 1.5 Pro emerged victorious in this test of mathematical acumen.

3. The Apple Test

Assessing AI’s understanding of context and coherence, we tasked both models with generating sentences ending with the word ‘Apple.’ Gemini 1.5 Pro and GPT-4o showcased varying degrees of proficiency in this test.

Gemini 1.5 Pro’s responses, while grammatically correct, occasionally veered into nonsensical territory, indicating lapses in contextual understanding. In contrast, GPT-4o exhibited a stronger grasp of coherence, crafting meaningful sentences with proper word usage. Therefore, GPT-4o demonstrated superior linguistic proficiency in this evaluation.

4. Common Sense Test

Unveiling AI’s grasp of common sense reasoning, we posed a classic riddle: “You throw a red ball into the blue sea. What color does the ball turn?” GPT-4o swiftly provided the correct answer, accompanied by a logical explanation.

Conversely, Gemini 1.5 Pro faltered in its response, attributing an irrelevant outcome to the scenario. This misinterpretation underscored the importance of refining common sense reasoning in AI models, positioning GPT-4o ahead in this regard.

5. Identifying Movie Name from an Image

Exploring AI’s visual recognition capabilities, we presented both models with an image featuring Robert Pattinson, challenging them to identify the movie depicted. Both Gemini 1.5 Pro and GPT-4o accurately recognized the movie, showcasing their proficiency in image recognition.

However, GPT-4o provided additional contextual insight, discerning the scene’s context as a funeral. This nuanced understanding hints at GPT-4o’s potential depth of comprehension compared to Gemini 1.5 Pro.

6. The General Knowledge Test

Lastly, we evaluated the AI models’ grasp of general knowledge with a question on the Big Bang theory. GPT-4o offered a well-structured response, elucidating key factors and acknowledging ongoing research.

In contrast, Gemini 1.5 Pro’s response, while informative, lacked the depth and coherence exhibited by GPT-4o. GPT-4o’s comprehensive explanation solidified its position as the superior informant in this test.

7. Emotional Intelligence Test

Exploring AI’s ability to perceive and respond to emotions, we devised a scenario where a character faces a dilemma. Both GPT-4o and Gemini 1.5 Pro were tasked with generating empathetic responses to the situation.

GPT-4o showcased nuanced emotional understanding, offering empathetic responses tailored to the character’s predicament. Its responses resonated with human-like empathy, demonstrating an advanced level of emotional intelligence.

Conversely, Gemini 1.5 Pro’s responses, while adequate, lacked the depth and emotional resonance exhibited by GPT-4o. This highlights the potential for further development in Gemini’s emotional understanding capabilities.

8. Predictive Analytics Test

Anticipating AI’s predictive capabilities, we presented both models with historical data and tasked them with forecasting future trends in a chosen domain.

GPT-4o leveraged its vast knowledge base and contextual understanding to generate insightful predictions, supported by logical reasoning and analysis of underlying patterns.

In contrast, Gemini 1.5 Pro’s predictions, while reasonable, lacked the depth and sophistication exhibited by GPT-4o. This underscores the importance of comprehensive data analysis and contextual understanding in predictive analytics.

9. Creative Writing Test

Assessing AI’s creativity and narrative capabilities, we challenged both models to craft a compelling short story based on a given prompt.

GPT-4o demonstrated remarkable creativity and storytelling prowess, weaving a captivating narrative with rich character development and plot twists. Its ability to evoke emotions and engage readers showcased its proficiency in creative writing.

On the other hand, Gemini 1.5 Pro’s narrative, while coherent, lacked the depth and imaginative flair exhibited by GPT-4o. This suggests potential areas for improvement in Gemini’s creative writing capabilities.

So, Who is Winer?

Based on the final score, GPT-4o emerges as the ultimate winner of this comparative analysis, outperforming Gemini 1.5 Pro in two crucial tests. However, it’s crucial to acknowledge that this score is derived solely from the specific tests conducted in this evaluation.

It’s essential to recognize that there may be other questions and test scenarios that could yield different results. Both GPT-4o and Gemini 1.5 Pro excel in their respective domains, with unique strengths and capabilities.

Gemini 1.5 Pro demonstrates proficiency in tackling tricky mathematical problems, showcasing its aptitude for complex numerical reasoning. On the other hand, GPT-4o shines in logical reasoning and general knowledge tasks, displaying a depth of understanding and coherence in its responses.

Moreover, both models exhibit competence in coding and developer-related tasks, indicating their utility in software development and programming contexts.

Conclusion

Choosing between GPT-4o and Gemini 1.5 Pro is like picking between Coke and Pepsi—each has unique features and integrations catering to different preferences and needs. Your choice will likely depend on your specific requirements and the ecosystems you are already integrated into.

For more in-depth reviews and hands-on experiences, check out Designtalks’s ChatGPT 4 vs Gemini Ultra: In-Depth Comparison, where you can find detailed analyses of various AI products and their capabilities.

Editors’ note: This article was created entirely by our expert editors and writers, with no AI assistance. For more about our AI policies, see our AI policy.