GPT-4o vs GPT-4: Which Model Performs Better?

TL;DR

GPT-4o performed better in summarization tone, image analysis, and the tested image-generation prompt, while GPT-4 presented research citations more clearly. Both models produced strong promotional copy, and GPT-4 successfully created a working Python Snake game. The free tier offers GPT-4o with usage limits, while paid plans provide higher limits.

Transcript

I just got access to the new chat GPT model GPT 40 and I'm going to compare it in this video versus GPT 4 the paid version so it's going to be comparing the new version that is free to everyone versus the paid version in the last video a lot of people were asking well why would I keep paying for gp4 if this new model is free and it beats gp4 good q... Read More

Key Insights

• GPT-4o access on the free tier is usage-dependent, and the transcript says users are switched back to GPT-3.5 when GPT-4o becomes unavailable or limited. The free offering includes data analysis, file uploads, web browsing, GPT discovery, and vision capabilities.
• Paid access provides higher stated usage limits than free access. The transcript reports that Plus users could send 80 GPT-4o messages every three hours and 40 GPT-4 messages every three hours, although those limits could be reduced during peak periods.
• GPT-4o produced the preferred tone in the summarization tests. Both models followed the requested short and detailed summary lengths, but GPT-4 used promotional phrasing that the reviewer considered less appropriate for a neutral summary.
• GPT-4o and GPT-4 performed similarly when creating a short promotional description for social media analytics software. Both supplied suitable product names, emphasized business benefits, and used promotional language that matched the marketing-focused instructions.
• GPT-4o received a slight advantage in the image-analysis test because its table stayed focused on the requested information. GPT-4 added color analysis but incorrectly labeled some chart colors, while GPT-4o omitted that unnecessary detail.
• GPT-4o generated the preferred image for the prompt depicting two AI robots in battle. Its result showed a more direct head-to-head composition and used a thumbnail-like shape, while GPT-4 returned a square image when no dimensions were specified.
• GPT-4 presented research sources more conveniently by placing references beside relevant points. GPT-4o searched quickly, produced practical step-by-step information, and listed sources at the bottom, but it did not connect those sources directly to individual claims.
• GPT-4 successfully generated Python code for a Snake game that ran without a problem in the demonstration. The game started quickly, responded during play, detected a collision with the wall, and displayed options to quit or play again.

Questions & Answers

Q: How did GPT-4o compare with GPT-4 for text summarization?

GPT-4o received the stronger assessment for summarization because it followed the requested lengths while producing a more suitable tone. GPT-4 also summarized the material accurately and respected the length requirements, but it included promotional wording such as language about enhanced speed. Across three tested web pages, GPT-4o more consistently delivered the neutral tone the reviewer wanted.

Q: Is GPT-4o available to free ChatGPT users?

GPT-4o was described as available to free ChatGPT users, but its availability depends on platform usage and is limited. When access becomes unavailable or the limit is reached, the transcript says the user is automatically switched back to GPT-3.5. At the time of recording, the reviewer had GPT-4o in Plus, Teams, and mobile accounts, but not yet in a free account.

Q: What usage limits were reported for GPT-4o and GPT-4?

The transcript reports that Plus users could send 80 messages every three hours with GPT-4o and up to 40 messages every three hours with GPT-4. It also notes that these limits could be reduced during peak periods. Teams users were said to receive higher usage, although the source did not provide an exact number of messages for that plan.

Q: Which ChatGPT features come with free GPT-4o access?

Free GPT-4o access was described as including data analysis, file uploading, web browsing, discovering and using GPTs from the GPT store, and vision capabilities. These were presented as capabilities previously associated with the paid ChatGPT experience. However, the free tier has usage-dependent availability, so GPT-4o may become temporarily unavailable and the conversation may switch to GPT-3.5.

Q: Which model was better for writing marketing copy?

Neither model clearly won the marketing-copy comparison. Both GPT-4 and GPT-4o created short, punchy product descriptions for software that tracks social media analytics. Each proposed a product name, described real-time analytics, and emphasized business benefits. Promotional expressions were considered appropriate because the prompt specifically requested website or marketing material rather than a neutral summary.

Q: Which model performed better at analyzing an image?

GPT-4o received a slight advantage in the image-analysis test. Both models converted the benchmark chart into a table and appeared to capture the numerical information correctly. GPT-4 added an analysis of the chart colors, but it confused some labels, including red, pink, and blue. GPT-4o skipped the unnecessary color commentary and stayed closer to the table request.

Q: How did GPT-4o and GPT-4 compare for web research?

The research test was judged approximately even. GPT-4 searched eight sites, returned working links, and placed references near the corresponding bullet points, making citation easier. GPT-4o searched five websites quickly and supplied practical, step-by-step information with sources at the bottom. Its main weakness was that individual statements were not directly connected to numbered source references.

Q: Could GPT-4 generate a working Python Snake game?

GPT-4 generated Python code for a Snake game and provided instructions intended for someone without programming experience. In the demonstration, the game ran without a problem, started quickly, responded to play, and recognized a collision with the wall. It then displayed options to quit or press a key to play again, showing that the tested GPT-4 output worked as requested.

Summary & Key Takeaways

• GPT-4o was compared directly with GPT-4 across text summarization, original marketing copy, multimodal image analysis, image generation, web research, and Python code generation. The tests emphasized practical output quality, including tone, formatting, factual extraction, source presentation, visual relevance, and whether generated code could run successfully on a computer.

• GPT-4o produced the preferred summarization tone while following the requested lengths, and both models wrote effective promotional product descriptions. In image analysis, GPT-4 supplied extra color details but made color-labeling errors, while GPT-4o stayed closer to the requested table and received a slight advantage despite responding more slowly and showing an error.

• The research comparison was judged roughly even because each model offered useful information, but GPT-4 placed references closer to individual claims. GPT-4o generated the preferred robot battle image, including a thumbnail-like shape and a stronger head-to-head composition. GPT-4 also produced a Snake game that ran correctly during the demonstrated test.