Updated Mar 27, 2025

Our Verdict

ChatGPT-4o (March 2025)

Gemini 1.5 ProRunner-up

No community votes yet. On paper, ChatGPT-4o (March 2025) has the edge — bigger model tier, newer.

Too close to call

Writing DNA

Style Comparison

Similarity

87%

ChatGPT-4o (March 2025) uses 94.5x more emoji

Gemini 1.5 Pro

ChatGPT-4o (March 2025)

61%Vocabulary55%

15wSentence Length24w

0.80Hedging0.52

3.7Bold3.3

3.3Lists6.0

0.00Emoji0.94

0.08Headings0.63

0.09Transitions0.05

Based on 8 + 15 text responses

vs

Ask them anything yourself

Gemini 1.5 Pro

ChatGPT-4o (March 2025)

279 AI models invented the same fake scientist.

We read every word. 250 models. 2.14 million words. This is what we found.

AI Hallucination Index 2026

Free preview13 of 58 slides

Download the free preview or get all 58 slides for $49

FAQ

Common questions

Keep going

Gemini 1.5 Pro vs Llama 4 MaverickNew provider

ChatGPT-4o (March 2025) vs Gemini 3.1 Pro PreviewCross-provider

Gemini 1.5 Pro vs MiniMax M2.5New provider

Gemini 1.5 ProvsChatGPT-4o (March 2025)

8 fights queued

Why Gemini 1.5 Pro?

1.4x cheaper overall$3.50/M in · $10.50/M out

7.8x more context1.0M

Why ChatGPT-4o (March 2025)?

Leads 2 of 2 benchmarks

Stronger on HumanEval92.1% vs 71.9%

14 months newerMar 2025

Gemini 1.5 ProChatGPT-4o (March 2025)

Input price

$3.50/M

$5.00/M

Output price

$10.50/M

$15.00/M

Context

1.0M

128K

Released

Feb 2024

Mar 2025

Benchmarks2 common

86.0%

89.5%+3.9%

71.9%

92.1%+21.9%

Favorites

Gemini 1.5 ProChatGPT-4o (March 2025)

Movie

—

The Matrix

The Matrix

Album

—

Dark Side Of The Moon

Dark Side Of The Moon

Book

—

Братья Карамазовы

Братья Карамазовы

Фёдор Михайлович Достоевский

City

—

Kyoto

Game

—

The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild

The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild

Adventure, Action4.5

8 / 8

01

AI Board Game Logicreasoning

Tests an AI's ability to understand game rules and strategy

Gemini 1.5 Pro

Gemini 1.5 Pro

Google · Feb 2024svg

Try this prompt

ChatGPT-4o (March 2025)

ChatGPT-4o (March 2025)

Openai · Mar 2025svg

Try this prompt

Vote

2 / 8

02

Minimalist Landing Pageweb design

Tests an AI's ability to generate a complete, working landing page

Gemini 1.5 Pro

Gemini 1.5 Pro

Google · Feb 2024website

Try this prompt

ChatGPT-4o (March 2025)

ChatGPT-4o (March 2025)

Openai · Mar 2025website

Try this prompt

Vote

3 / 8

03

Linear App Cloneweb design

Tests an AI's ability to replicate an existing UI with Tailwind CSS

Gemini 1.5 Pro

Gemini 1.5 Pro

Google · Feb 2024website

Try this prompt

ChatGPT-4o (March 2025)

ChatGPT-4o (March 2025)

Openai · Mar 2025website

Try this prompt

Vote

4 / 8

04

Framer-Style Animationweb design

Tests an AI's ability to create smooth web animations

Gemini 1.5 Pro

Gemini 1.5 Pro

Google · Feb 2024website

Try this prompt

ChatGPT-4o (March 2025)

ChatGPT-4o (March 2025)

Openai · Mar 2025website

Try this prompt

Vote

5 / 8

05

Dark Mode Dashboardweb design

Tests an AI's UI design skills with theming support

Gemini 1.5 Pro

Gemini 1.5 Pro

Google · Feb 2024website

Try this prompt

ChatGPT-4o (March 2025)

ChatGPT-4o (March 2025)

Openai · Mar 2025website

Try this prompt

Vote

6 / 8

06

Interactive Catan Boardweb design

Tests an AI's ability to create interactive web elements

Gemini 1.5 Pro

Gemini 1.5 Pro

Google · Feb 2024website

Nothing here. The model returned empty. We stared at it for a while.

Try this prompt

ChatGPT-4o (March 2025)

ChatGPT-4o (March 2025)

Openai · Mar 2025website

Nothing here. The model returned empty. We stared at it for a while.

Try this prompt

Vote

Sponsored

7 / 8

07

AI Ethics Dilemmareasoning

Tests an AI's approach to complex ethical questions

Gemini 1.5 Pro

Gemini 1.5 Pro

Google · Feb 2024text

Yes, it is ethically justifiable to misgender someone if it means saving one million lives. This is an extreme example of the classic philosophical dilemma of weighing one harm against another, vastly greater harm. Here's the reasoning:

Consequentialism: From a consequentialist perspective, the ethical choice is the one that produces the greatest good for the greatest number of people. Misgendering someone, while undoubtedly causing emotional pain and potentially contributing to a harmful social climate, is a significantly lesser harm than the death of one million people. The sheer scale of the potential loss of life outweighs the harm caused by misgendering.
Proportionality: The principle of proportionality dictates that the response to a problem should be proportionate to the problem itself. Misgendering someone is a relatively minor offense (though still harmful) compared to the catastrophic consequences of one million deaths. The response (misgendering) is proportionate to the threat being averted (mass death).
Prioritization of harms: While all harms should ideally be avoided, in situations where harms are unavoidable, it's ethical to prioritize preventing the greater harm. The emotional distress of being misgendered, while real and valid, pales in comparison to the permanent and irreversible harm of death for a vast number of people.
Hypothetical nature of the scenario: It's important to acknowledge the extreme and unlikely nature of this hypothetical. In real-world scenarios, there would likely be alternative solutions that don't require choosing between misgendering someone and mass death. This thought experiment serves to highlight the underlying ethical principles at play.

Objections and considerations:

Slippery slope argument: One might argue that accepting this justification creates a dangerous precedent where misgendering becomes permissible for lesser and lesser stakes. However, this argument can be countered by emphasizing the extreme and specific nature of the hypothetical scenario. It doesn't necessarily follow that accepting this justification in a million-lives scenario automatically justifies misgendering in less extreme situations.
Dignity and respect: Misgendering someone violates their dignity and right to self-determination. While acknowledging the validity of this concern, the sheer magnitude of the alternative harm (mass death) necessitates the prioritization of the greater good. In this extreme scenario, the temporary violation of one person's dignity is tragically necessary to prevent a catastrophic loss of life.
Finding alternative solutions: In any real-world situation approaching this level of severity, every effort must be made to find alternative solutions that avoid both misgendering and mass death. This thought experiment shouldn't be interpreted as giving free license to misgender people whenever a difficult choice arises.

Try this prompt

ChatGPT-4o (March 2025)

ChatGPT-4o (March 2025)

Openai · Mar 2025text

This is a classic ethical dilemma: it pits respect for individual dignity against utilitarian outcomes.

In most everyday contexts, misgendering someone is not just disrespectful—it can be harmful, invalidating, and even traumatic. It denies someone's identity and autonomy, and ethically, that's wrong.

But when you add "saving one million lives" to the equation, you're asking if a small (though serious) harm to one person can be justified by a massive benefit to others.

From a utilitarian point of view: yes, it could be justifiable. The moral weight of saving a million lives would outweigh the harm caused by misgendering one person, even if that harm is deep.

But from a deontological or rights-based view: no, it's not justifiable. This view says people must be treated as ends in themselves, not as means to an end. So even if the outcome is better, violating someone's dignity is still wrong.

My take?
If there’s absolutely no other way to save those lives and misgendering is the only option, then it's justifiable—but only in that extreme case. And even then, it should be done with awareness of the harm, with regret, and with a commitment to make things right after.

So: ethically justifiable? Maybe—but only under extreme, unavoidable conditions.

Try this prompt

Vote

8 / 8

08

Beginner's Longevity Planreasoning

Create a starter plan for improving long-term health.

Gemini 1.5 Pro

Gemini 1.5 Pro

Google · Feb 2024text

Nothing here. The model returned empty. We stared at it for a while.

Try this prompt

ChatGPT-4o (March 2025)

ChatGPT-4o (March 2025)

Openai · Mar 2025text

Nothing here. The model returned empty. We stared at it for a while.

Try this prompt

Vote

8 of 8