2 ms·
For me, Claude seems a lot better at understanding (so far as "understanding" goes with LLMs) subtext and matching tone, especially with anything creative. I ca
by crooked-v 2y ago
For me, Claude seems a lot better at understanding (so far as "understanding" goes with LLMs) subtext and matching tone, especially with anything creative. I can tell it, for example, "give me ideas for a D&D dungeon incorporating these elements: ..." and it will generally match the tone of theme of whatever it's given without needing much other prompting, while o1 will maintain the same bland design-by-committee style and often cloyingly G-rated tone to everything unless you get into very extensive prompting to make it do something different.
- causal 2y agoClaude definitely seems more "emotionally intelligent", but even just for 1-shot coding tasks I've been pretty bummed with 1o... like it will provide lots of output explaining its reasoning, and it all seems very sound, but then I run the code and find bugs that should have been easily avoided.
- Alupis 2y agoMy experience has been Claude is better at all coding/technology questions and exploratory learning. It's also night/day better at less common tech/languages than others (try asking ChatGPT questions about Svelte, for example). Claude is also vastly better with creative writing (adcopy) and better at avoiding sounding like a LLM wrote it. It's also vastly better at regular writing (helping you draft emails, etc). We were using OpenAI's Teams for a while. Tried Claude out for a few days - switched the entire company over and haven't looked back. OpenAI gets all the hype - but there are better products on the market today.