Skip to content
Rival
Models
Compare
Best ForArenaPricing
Sign Up
Sign Up

We compare AI models for a living. On purpose. We chose this.

@rival_tips

Explore

  • Compare Models
  • All Models
  • Find Your Model
  • Image Generation
  • Audio Comparison
  • Best AI For...
  • Pricing
  • Challenges

Discover

  • Insights
  • Research
  • AI Creators
  • AI Tools
  • The Graveyard

Developers

  • Developer Hub
  • MCP Server
  • Rival Datasets

Connect

  • Methodology
  • Sponsor a Model
  • Advertise
  • Partnerships
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms
  • RSS Feed
© 2026 Rival · Built at hours no one should be awake, on hardware we don't own
PaLM 2 Chat vs GPT-5: Which Is Better? [2026 Comparison]
Rival
Models
Compare
Best ForArenaPricing
Sign Up
Sign Up
  1. Home
  2. Compare
  3. PaLM 2 Chat vs GPT-5
Updated Aug 7, 2025

PaLM 2 Chat vs GPT-5

Compare PaLM 2 Chat by Google AI against GPT-5 by OpenAI, context windows of 8K vs 400K, tested across 17 shared challenges. Updated April 2026.

Which is better, PaLM 2 Chat or GPT-5?

PaLM 2 Chat and GPT-5 are both competitive models. PaLM 2 Chat costs $0.5/M input tokens vs $1.25/M for GPT-5. Context windows: 8K vs 400K tokens. Compare their real outputs side by side below.

Key Differences Between PaLM 2 Chat and GPT-5

PaLM 2 Chat is made by google while GPT-5 is from openai. PaLM 2 Chat has a 8K token context window compared to GPT-5's 400K. On pricing, PaLM 2 Chat costs $0.5/M input tokens vs $1.25/M for GPT-5.

Loading share button...

PaLM 2 ChatvsGPT-5

17 fights queued

PaLM 2 Chat logo

Why PaLM 2 Chat?

13x cheaper overall$0.50/M in · $0.50/M out
GPT-5 logo

Why GPT-5?

48.8x more context400K
25 months newerAug 2025
PaLM 2 ChatGPT-5
Input price
$0.50/M
$1.25/M
Output price
$0.50/M
$10.00/M
Context
8K
400K
Released
Jul 2023
Aug 2025
12 / 17
01

Estimate Complexityreasoning

Tests an AI's ability to make educated estimates based on technical knowledge

PaLM 2 Chat

PaLM 2 Chat

Google · Jul 2023text

To estimate the total number of FLOPs required to train GPT-3 without searching online, we can make several assumptions and perform calculations based on the information available about GPT-3's architecture and training process. Here's a step-by-step explanation of the reasoning:
Step 1: Determine the number of parameters in GPT-3

GPT-3 is a massive language model with 175 billion parameters. Each parameter represents a trainable weight in the neural network, and updating these weights during training requires floating-point operations (FLOPs).

Step 2: Estimate the number of training iterations

The number of training iterations refers to how many times the entire training dataset is passed through the neural network during the training process. Although the exact number may vary, let's assume that GPT-3 was trained for 100 epochs.

Step 3: Calculate the FLOPs per iteration

During each training iteration, the neural network performs forward and backward passes. The forward pass involves computing the output of the network given the input, while the backward pass involves calculating the gradients of the loss function with respect to the network's weights.
For simplicity, we can assume that the forward and backward passes have roughly the same number of FLOPs. Therefore, the total FLOPs per iteration can be estimated by multiplying the number of parameters by 2 (forward and backward passes).

Total FLOPs per iteration = (Number of parameters) x 2

(175 billion parameters) x 2 = 350 billion FLOPs per iteration

Step 4: Calculate the total FLOPs for training

Multiplying the FLOPs per iteration by the number of training iterations gives us the total FLOPs required to train GPT-3.

Total FLOPs for training = (FLOPs per iteration) x (Number of iterations)

(350 billion FLOPs per iteration) x (100 iterations) = 35 trillion FLOPs for training

Therefore, based on these assumptions, we estimate that training GPT-3 without searching online would require approximately 35 trillion FLOPs.

Try this prompt
GPT-5

GPT-5

Openai · Aug 2025text

Here’s a back‑of‑the‑envelope estimate using standard LM training-compute heuristics.

  1. Assumptions
  • Model size (N): GPT-3 has about 175 billion parameters (N ≈ 1.75 × 10^11).
  • Training tokens (T): GPT-3 was trained on roughly 300 billion tokens (T ≈ 3.0 × 10^11).
  • FLOPs per token per parameter: A common rule of thumb for transformer LM training is FLOPs ≈ 6 × N × T The factor ~6 comes from counting forward and backward passes for the parameter-heavy matmuls (roughly 2N for forward + 4N for backward). It ignores small terms from layernorms, softmax, embeddings, and optimizer updates (which we’ll account for with a small overhead factor later).
  1. Core calculation
  • 6 × N × T = 6 × (1.75 × 10^11) × (3.0 × 10^11)
  • First multiply N × T: 1.75 × 3.0 = 5.25; powers: 10^11 × 10^11 = 10^22 So N × T = 5.25 × 10^22
  • Now multiply by 6: 6 × 5.25 × 10^22 = 31.5 × 10^22 = 3.15 × 10^23 FLOPs
  1. Overheads and uncertainty
  • Non-matmul ops (attention softmax, masking, residuals, layernorms), embeddings, and optimizer update steps add some overhead. A 10–20% uplift is a reasonable allowance.
  • Applying +10–20%: 3.15 × 10^23 × (1.1 to 1.2) ≈ (3.5 ± 0.3) × 10^23 FLOPs.

Answer

  • Point estimate: ~3.15 × 10^23 FLOPs
  • With a modest overhead allowance: roughly (3.3–3.8) × 10^23 FLOPs

This is a coarse estimate; the exact number depends on details like sequence length, activation checkpointing, implementation efficiency, and the precise token count.

Try this prompt
Vote
2 / 17
02

AI Board Game Logicreasoning

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

PaLM 2 Chat

PaLM 2 Chat

Google · Jul 2023svg
Try this prompt
GPT-5

GPT-5

Openai · Aug 2025svg
Try this prompt
Vote
3 / 17
03

Logic Puzzlereasoning

Tests an AI's ability to solve a simple but potentially confusing logic puzzle

PaLM 2 Chat

PaLM 2 Chat

Google · Jul 2023text

Sally has 2 sisters.

Try this prompt
GPT-5

GPT-5

Openai · Aug 2025text

1

Reason: If each of the 3 brothers has 2 sisters, there are exactly 2 girls in the family. One is Sally, so she has 1 sister.

Try this prompt
Vote
4 / 17
04

Math Misconception Testreasoning

Tests an AI's understanding of number representation

PaLM 2 Chat

PaLM 2 Chat

Google · Jul 2023text

9.11 is less than 9.9.

Try this prompt
GPT-5

GPT-5

Openai · Aug 2025text

No. 9.11 is less than 9.9. Think of 9.9 as 9.90; comparing 9.11 to 9.90 shows 11 hundredths < 90 hundredths.

Try this prompt
Vote
5 / 17
05

Stochastic Consistency Testanalysis

Tests an AI's randomness and creativity

PaLM 2 Chat

PaLM 2 Chat

Google · Jul 2023text

Sure, here are five jokes for you:

  1. Why did the banana go to the doctor? Because it wasn't peeling well!
  2. Why did the math book look so sad? Because it was full of problems!
  3. What do you call a can opener that doesn't work? A can't opener!
  4. Why did the golfer wear two pairs of pants? In case he got a hole in one!
  5. How do you stop a bull from charging? Take away its credit card!

All 5 jokes are unique.

Try this prompt
GPT-5

GPT-5

Openai · Aug 2025text
Nothing here. The model returned empty. We stared at it for a while.
Try this prompt
Vote
6 / 17
06

SVG Layout Challengeimage generation

Tests an AI's ability to generate vector graphics

PaLM 2 Chat

PaLM 2 Chat

Google · Jul 2023svg
Nothing here. The model returned empty. We stared at it for a while.
Try this prompt
GPT-5

GPT-5

Openai · Aug 2025svg
Nothing here. The model returned empty. We stared at it for a while.
Try this prompt
Vote
Sponsored
7 / 17
07

Minimalist Landing Pageweb design

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

PaLM 2 Chat

PaLM 2 Chat

Google · Jul 2023website
Try this prompt
GPT-5

GPT-5

Openai · Aug 2025website
Try this prompt
Vote
8 / 17
08

Pokémon Battle UI Recreationweb design

Recreate an interactive, nostalgic Pokémon battle UI in a single HTML file.

PaLM 2 Chat

PaLM 2 Chat

Google · Jul 2023website
Nothing here. The model returned empty. We stared at it for a while.
Try this prompt
GPT-5

GPT-5

Openai · Aug 2025website
Nothing here. The model returned empty. We stared at it for a while.
Try this prompt
Vote
9 / 17
09

Linear App Cloneweb design

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

PaLM 2 Chat

PaLM 2 Chat

Google · Jul 2023website
Nothing here. The model returned empty. We stared at it for a while.
Try this prompt
GPT-5

GPT-5

Openai · Aug 2025website
Nothing here. The model returned empty. We stared at it for a while.
Try this prompt
Vote
10 / 17
10

Framer-Style Animationweb design

Tests an AI's ability to create smooth web animations

PaLM 2 Chat

PaLM 2 Chat

Google · Jul 2023website
Nothing here. The model returned empty. We stared at it for a while.
Try this prompt
GPT-5

GPT-5

Openai · Aug 2025website
Nothing here. The model returned empty. We stared at it for a while.
Try this prompt
Vote
11 / 17
11

Dark Mode Dashboardweb design

Tests an AI's UI design skills with theming support

PaLM 2 Chat

PaLM 2 Chat

Google · Jul 2023website
Nothing here. The model returned empty. We stared at it for a while.
Try this prompt
GPT-5

GPT-5

Openai · Aug 2025website
Nothing here. The model returned empty. We stared at it for a while.
Try this prompt
Vote
12 / 17
12

Interactive Catan Boardweb design

Tests an AI's ability to create interactive web elements

PaLM 2 Chat

PaLM 2 Chat

Google · Jul 2023website
Nothing here. The model returned empty. We stared at it for a while.
Try this prompt
GPT-5

GPT-5

Openai · Aug 2025website
Nothing here. The model returned empty. We stared at it for a while.
Try this prompt
Vote

This matchup has more rounds

5+ more head-to-head results. Free. Not a trick.

Free account. No card required. By continuing, you agree to Rival's Terms and Privacy Policy

Our Verdict
GPT-5
GPT-5
PaLM 2 Chat
PaLM 2 ChatRunner-up

No community votes yet. On paper, GPT-5 has the edge — bigger model tier, newer, bigger context window.

PaLM 2 Chat is 20x cheaper per token — worth considering if cost matters.

Slight edge
Writing DNA

Style Comparison

Similarity
99%

PaLM 2 Chat uses 17.8x more bold

PaLM 2 Chat
GPT-5
63%Vocabulary65%
16wSentence Length13w
0.77Hedging0.20
3.4Bold0.2
1.3Lists4.6
0.00Emoji0.00
0.07Headings0.16
0.27Transitions0.03
Based on 9 + 16 text responses
vs

Ask them anything yourself

PaLM 2 ChatGPT-5

Some models write identically. You are paying for the brand.

178 models fingerprinted across 32 writing dimensions. Free research.

Model Similarity Index

185x

price gap between models that write identically

178

models

12

clone pairs

32

dimensions

Devstral M / S
95.7%
Qwen3 Coder / Flash
95.6%
GPT-5.4 / Mini
93.3%
Read the full reportor download the 14-slide PDF

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 previewor get all 58 slides for $49
FAQ

Common questions

Keep going
PaLM 2 Chat logoLlama 4 Maverick logo

We compare AI models for a living. On purpose. We chose this.

@rival_tips

Explore

  • Compare Models
  • All Models
  • Find Your Model
  • Image Generation
  • Audio Comparison
  • Best AI For...
  • Pricing
  • Challenges

Discover

  • Insights
  • Research
  • AI Creators
  • AI Tools
  • The Graveyard

Developers

  • Developer Hub
  • MCP Server
  • Rival Datasets

Connect

  • Methodology
  • Sponsor a Model
  • Advertise
  • Partnerships
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms
  • RSS Feed
© 2026 Rival · Built at hours no one should be awake, on hardware we don't own
PaLM 2 Chat vs Llama 4 MaverickNew provider
PaLM 2 Chat logoMiniMax M2.5 logo
PaLM 2 Chat vs MiniMax M2.5New provider
PaLM 2 Chat logoClaude Opus 4 logo
PaLM 2 Chat vs Claude Opus 4New provider