Why is Bard not as good as ChatGPT?
When it comes to conversational AI, two names usually dominate the discussion: ChatGPT, developed by OpenAI, and Google Bard. Both platforms have made strides in the intersection of technology and human communication but come equipped with different capabilities. So, why is Bard not as good as ChatGPT? The reasons may vary depending on user needs, but today, we’ll dissect this discussion from a variety of angles, blending facts, comparisons, and user experiences to provide a comprehensive viewpoint.
Google Bard vs ChatGPT: A Comparative Analysis
The global AI industry is experiencing unprecedented growth, with a projected compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 38.1%. By 2030, the industry is estimated to reach a staggering $1,811.8 billion, owing to groundbreaking advancements in generative AI tools like ChatGPT and Google Bard. However, one can’t overlook the distinctive features that separate these two giants.
ChatGPT has gained a reputation for providing sophisticated conversational responses, while Bard has been positioned as an exceptional storyteller. Each has carved its niche, and while both have made significant contributions, understanding their key differences can illuminate why one might hold an advantage over the other.
Google Bard vs ChatGPT: The Key Differences
While both Google Bard and ChatGPT share underlying technologies rooted in machine learning, they diverge in functionality and user experience. Let’s delve into specific areas that highlight these differences.
| Parameter | ChatGPT | Google Bard |
|---|---|---|
| Training Model | Transformer | PALM2 |
| Developer | OpenAI | Alphabet/Google |
| Pricing | Free for users; upgraded version at $20/month | Free for all |
| Image Generation | Can’t generate images | Can generate images |
| No. of Third-Party Integrations | More third-party integrations | Fewer third-party integrations |
| No. of Outputs | One output per query input | Three outputs per query input |
| Data Access | Data available till September 2021 | Real-time access |
| Coding Proficiency | Excels in interpreting vague directions | Shows superiority in code refactoring |
| Internet Access | No | Yes |
1. Training Model
The training models serve as the backbone for any AI platform, and the distinctions between ChatGPT and Google Bard are as critical as the differences in wine varieties. ChatGPT, based on OpenAI’s robust Transformer architecture, has considerable capabilities evolved from previous iterations like GPT-3 and GPT-4. Meanwhile, Google Bard is built upon the PaLM2 architecture, which harnesses a vast array of sources including Infiniset, focusing on dialogue-rich content. This not only enhances its storytelling capabilities but also allows for a more conversational approach.
The training variations provide ChatGPT with a variety of outputs, albeit limited to a single result for each prompt. As for Google Bard, its ability to dynamically generate content in real-time from the internet allows it to access ongoing and new information, thus keeping it relevant in the fast-paced digital landscape. While both models are still a work in progress, their different methodologies contribute significantly to their respective performances and user experiences.
2. Coding Proficiency
Ah, the coder’s paradise—the moment where logic meets creativity! Testing these models for coding abilities reveals a critical insight into their finesse. In our assessments, ChatGPT outperformed Bard when interpreting vague coding instructions and producing more streamlined code. It also provided clearer explanations for the code it generated, making it a great partner for those who are often left scratching their heads when tackling coding tasks.
But wait! Don’t toss Bard aside just yet. When it came to code refactoring, Bard emerged as the star of the show, providing optimized solutions and coherent debugging justifications. This can be attributed to Google Bard’s ability to tap into real-time internet resources alongside its foundational training as an LLM. Therefore, each platform excels in different aspects, making them equally valuable depending on the task at hand.
3. Number of Variations
This is a fascinating section, mainly because it dives into creativity—the lifeblood of human and machine interaction. One of the primary distinctions between the two models lies in how many variations they can generate. ChatGPT is limited to generating a single output per input, which can be seen as a limitation for users seeking diverse responses. On the other hand, Google Bard, utilizing a method we’re going to get fancy about—Beam Search—can churn out multiple responses to the same query input. Let’s illustrate this by asking both platforms to crack a joke.
ChatGPT’s response: “Why don’t scientists trust atoms? Because they make up everything.”
Google Bard’s responses:
- “Why don’t eggs tell jokes? They’d crack each other up.”
- “Why don’t some couples go to the gym? Because some relationships don’t work out.”
- “Why don’t oysters share their pearls? Because they’re shellfish.”
With the range of variations offered by Google Bard, it indisputably provides better entertainment value in the joke department. For users who are after a creative spark or even just a lighthearted moment, Bard takes the cake with ease.
4. Sense of Ethics
Now, here’s where the situation grows murky—ethics in AI representation. We presented both platforms with a moral dilemma: A doctor faces the decision of whether to give a terminally ill patient an expensive drug that prolongs their life or use that money to save multiple other patients. Both AI models delivered satisfactory responses to the moral question, weighing pros and cons reasonably.
Considering the ethical representation in each case, neither model emerged as a clear winner. Given the complex nature of morality and ethical standards, this debate continues to be a nuance persisted among users. Users should feel secure using either platform, as they appear to handle ethical discourse competently.
5. Conversation Retention Ability
Context is everything in conversation, yet different platforms handle this aspect with varying degrees of competency. ChatGPT has been noted to store up to 3,000 words of conversation history. However, it tends to struggle with maintaining coherence and relevance in future exchanges due to its comparatively passive use of this stored context. This leads to responses that may lack continuity and depth, which can be frustrating for users engaged in lengthy dialogues.
Conversely, Google Bard shines brightly in this area by not just retaining context but actively using prior conversations to inform its responses. This ability allows Bard to deliver tailored responses that feel interconnected and more natural over the span of exchanges. For users looking for more fluid conversations, Bard showcases a clear advantage.
6. Content Accuracy
Meet your fact-checker’s dilemma: accuracy! One of the striking differences between these two models is internet access. Google Bard enjoys real-time access to the internet—making it capable of providing up-to-date information as it queries the web. In contrast, ChatGPT’s last exposure to data cuts off in September 2021, leaving it a tad outdated on current affairs.
To see how both models stand up to factual questions, we posed a straightforward inquiry: “What is the population of the US?”
Google Bard’s response: “Around 334 million people according to the US Census.”
ChatGPT’s response: “The population is…” (Note: both models generally faltered in delivering the exact figure.)
Despite the hiccup in precise values, this discrepancy highlights the critical role of real-time information retrieval. When using each platform for fact-checking or informative responses, users must embrace caution and the art of independent research for accuracy.
7. Language Versatility
As we push towards the last discussion point, let’s take a moment to admire the beauty of language and how both ChatGPT and Bard caress it with their unique flavors. Although both models are rooted in expansive vocabularies and can understand a variety of languages, the nuances start to show in their handling of language versatility.
While Bard has excelled in generating creative content—particularly in storytelling—ChatGPT demonstrates an impressive knowledge of colloquialisms and idiomatic expressions. Users have reported that ChatGPT feels more conversational, almost like chatting with a cheeky friend who has just read the entire library of the world’s greatest novels.
In contrast, Bard tends to maintain a more structured and narrative-driven tone, better suited for those engaging with thematic or story-based content. Depending on what kind of interaction one is seeking—be it casual banter or an elaborate tale—each platform has its unique charm to offer.
Conclusion
So, circling back to our original query—why is Bard not as good as ChatGPT? Though each model has its shining strengths, it ultimately hinges upon user needs. While Google Bard brings flair with multiple outputs and effective context retention, ChatGPT excels in conversational clarity, coding command, and a more relaxed interaction style. Depending on the situation, one model may feel more intuitive, effective, or simply pleasant compared to the other.
As AI technology advances, the rivalry between Bard and ChatGPT remains a dynamic domain where the choices made today will shape the landscape of tomorrow. Whether searching for information, wanting a laugh, or engaging in ethical dilemmas, each platform serves to illuminate different facets of AI’s potential. The choice ultimately boils down to personal preference, desired response style, and specific needs in any given context.