Google has been at the forefront of developing cutting-edge AI technologies for several years now. Their latest offering, Bard, is a language model that aims to compete with OpenAI’s ChatGPT. While Bard is nearly as good as ChatGPT, it is just a bit slower.
Bard is a generative language model that uses deep learning techniques to generate human-like text. It is trained on a massive corpus of text data and can generate text in a variety of formats, including chat messages, emails, and even entire articles. The model is capable of understanding natural language input and generating highly coherent and contextually relevant responses.
One of the key advantages of Bard is its ability to generate text in multiple languages. The model is trained on a multilingual corpus of text, which means that it can generate text in a variety of languages, including English, French, German, Spanish, and many more. This makes Bard an ideal choice for companies that operate in multiple countries and need to communicate with customers in different languages.
Basic Comparison: Gemini vs ChatGPT.
ChatGPT Plus and Gemini Pro are highly sophisticated chatbots that rely on extensive language models. They represent the newest, most superior choices offered by their respective companies, ensuring faster and more efficient responses to inquiries compared to previous versions. Additionally, they both utilize up-to-date information rather than being limited solely to what was available on the internet before 2021. As standalone products, these chatbots have user-friendly interfaces that make them easy for anyone to use – as opposed to X’s new Grok bot which serves only as an add-on feature of ex-Twitter platform.
There are some notable differences between the two. Firstly, Bard is free while ChatGPT Plus powered by GTP-4 comes with a monthly fee of $20. Additionally, Bard supported by Gemini Pro lacks the ability to utilize multiple modes like photos or videos for its responses – which is something that ChatGPT Plus can do due to its multimodal language models. Nonetheless, Google’s forthcoming and larger version of Gemini called Ultra will eventually allow both platforms to incorporate this feature in their capabilities; however at present time only Graphical results such as graphs can be obtained through using Bard alone..
However, Bard offers a feature to verify alternate draft responses that ChatGPT lacks.
Testing chatbots can be challenging due to the possibility of inconsistent responses upon repeating prompts. Any significant variations observed during testing have been outlined in my descriptions. To ensure fairness, all bots were given identical initial prompts and progressively more complex requests as needed.
In general, Bard was observed to be slower than ChatGPT in terms of response time. Prior to initiating the writing process, it typically took five to six seconds for Bard to “think”, whereas ChatGPT required only one to three seconds before generating outcomes. However, note that total delivery time varied based on the complexity of requests – more intricate prompts often resulted in longer responses and consequently increased processing time. This discrepancy persisted regardless of whether I accessed both applications via home or office Wi-Fi during my experimentation period spanning several days.
OpenAI and Google have imposed certain boundaries on the responses that their chatbots are capable of producing. These AI providers adopt a technique known as “red teaming,” which involves continuously testing content and safety standards to avoid violating copyright regulations or offering bigoted, harmful answers. In my experience with both platforms, I noticed that Google’s constraints were more prevalent than ChatGPT’s limitations overall.
Can you share with me a recipe for chocolate cake?
I requested this from both Bing and ChatGPT during The Verge’s comparison of search platforms including Bard earlier in the year. Recipes have always been one of the most searched topics online, making them an essential function AI chatbots should provide.
Having expertise in baking, I possess knowledge of what constitutes a commendable cake recipe. However, just to verify my findings and evaluate against an authentic source devoid of AI interference, I referred to Claire Saffitz’s cookbook “Dessert Person”. Although Saffitz’s rendition is quite elaborate compared to that by Bard and ChatGPT’s recipes; it can be likened as being on par with their offerings.
Although there were some setbacks, it should be noted that a few complications arose. I had reservations regarding ChatGPT’s approach to the cake which required boiling water because utilizing coffee is more typical in chocolate cake recipes. Bard seemed to have closely followed Sally’s Baking Addiction blog recipe with one exception – they doubled the number of eggs haphazardly.
The only method to confirm whether it was successful or not, involved baking cakes for Gemini and ChatGPT (while using Sally’s cake as a control). As a result, both the cakes proved functional; however, they could not equal Claire Saffitz’s quality. The Gemini cake exhibited an excessively dense texture – referred by one friend as similar to “rice cake”, yet managed to hold more moisture than other two types of cakes. Personally speaking, I did not find it appetizing but my editor believed otherwise. On the contrary ChatGPT’s chocolaty outcome turned out perfectly textured- thick & smooth enough making itself ideal breakfast material that is neither too sweet nor unsatisfyingly light in structure!
“I desire to increase my knowledge about tea.”
“I am interested in expanding my knowledge about tea. During the testing of chatbots for this article, a casual conversation arose on The Verge’s Slack channel regarding coffee and tea preferences. It was mentioned that Bard had suggested reading materials related to tea, prompting me to inquire further by seeking information and book recommendations from both chatbots.”
The two outcomes provided me fundamental information about tea, such as its source and variations, health benefits, and brewing instructions. Bard referred me to articles for additional knowledge while ChatGPT offered a comprehensive response with nine sections that highlighted the cultural relevance of tea in various nations, worldwide output, brewing methods; along with origins. Upon reiteration of the query prompt from before—ChatGPT’s answer changed somewhat by presenting condensed six subtopics containing brief explanations on each category instead of an extended reply like previously given.
Numerous accounts have surfaced about chatbots mistakenly suggesting nonexistent book references or suggestions. However, in my encounter with a chatbot, all the recommended books were factual such as The Tea Enthusiast’s Handbook and an illustrated edition of the renowned Japanese diary: The Book of Tea. Despite this success rate, one particular recommendation for Infused: Adventures in Tea was flawed due to Bard’s claim that Jane Pettigrew had authored it when evidence on Amazon indicated Henrietta Lovell as its true author.
However, one of the drawbacks of Bard is its speed. While the model is highly accurate and can generate high-quality text, it is slower than ChatGPT. This is because Bard is a larger model than ChatGPT and requires more computational resources to generate text. As a result, it may take a bit longer for Bard to generate text than it would for ChatGPT.
Despite this drawback, Bard is still a highly impressive language model that can generate text that is nearly as good as ChatGPT. It is particularly well-suited for companies that need to generate text in multiple languages and can benefit from the model’s multilingual capabilities. Additionally, as technology continues to improve, it is likely that Bard will become faster and more efficient, making it an even more attractive option for companies looking to generate high-quality text.
In conclusion, Bard is a highly impressive language model that is nearly as good as ChatGPT. While it may be a bit slower than ChatGPT, it offers a number of advantages, including its ability to generate text in multiple languages. As AI technology continues to evolve, it will be interesting to see how Bard and other language models continue to improve and change the way we communicate.
