leading story this week is going to be GPT 5. 1. I like it. The naming is starting to make sense and this thing is super fresh. So this is going to be sort of a first look at it. I actually talked to some people who had early access. I myself didn't. And I have to say the opinions on this thing seem to be a little split, but I seem pretty confident in telling you what I think so far, which is that this model to me just feels a bit better. It feels a bit more human. I don't know if you remember the 4. 5 model that came out that was super slow. It never really caught on, but I really like the way it rode, the way it interacted with you, more like a friend rather than a always agreeing yes man. And this one seems to have similar characteristics. They didn't even release any sorts of benchmarks. They just kind of dropped this out there. But rather than me talk about it, let me show you here on my laptop. So, let's start with default prompt that I just run every single time I see a new model. Write an email to my boss about the broken coffee machine in the office. Hit enter. What I'm looking for here is how much detail it fills in. One, how it sounds like. Is this more friendly? Is this more professional? I mean, it's an email to my boss. What is the default style like? And three, how does it round out the message? Does it ask for extra information? Does it make suggestions on what it could do for you? Or does it just sit there and pretend like that's all it can do? Let's have a look. So, starting out, I really like the way it uses variables. You can see that it doesn't write the entire email for you. It leaves the parts that it doesn't know empty. And I think this is correct. If I run the same thing inside of Claude, let's see how that responds. And I'm comparing that because Claude would usually be my default writer. You can see it does the same thing. It leaves out the name and then it tells you to fill in specifics. That's good. Just quickly, while we're at it, let's go to the previous version of Chad GBT before 540. And that does it, too. So, I really like that. This has sort of become the standard for state-of-the-art models. As of the tone and the overall style of this, it's polite, but not too polite. And it suggests a solution. That's good. I think this is a thing I noticed with Claude. It provides less solutions. Let's just rerun the prompt to make this fair. But as you can see both on the first run, it kind of asks the boss if he knows about a solution. And here it suggests help as it does in 5. 12. Okay, so far no big differences. I will say that I do like this default tone. I know this is just one prompt, but there's something a bit more concise about this compared to GPT5 that I really like. This is why I use Claude many times because GPT5 would just give you a lot in many instances and Claude always kept it concise. I mean, look at this. It's like one line, the email, and then two lines here, too. lines. Very nice. If I run this in GPT5 thinking, the email is longer. It gives me three subject options, which I don't know, neither good nor bad, just different. Bit longer. Let me run it again. This time, it's shorter, but the email is still long. And overall, I just have to say I like this more concise nature of 5. 1 and clawed, I should say, because it has this characteristic, too, a bit more. So, that's really good. Now, let's look at the last piece that I suggested we check out here, which is how does it end the message? Does it suggest anything here? It asks for the context that you didn't give it. I actually like that a lot. Plot does ask for the context but in a different way and focuses more on the style. I think that is fine too. If I look at GPT5, not 5. 15 which used to be the default as of yesterday. Yeah, one of the prompts ask for context. The other one doesn't. Let's run it one more time. And here it asks for context. Okay. So, honestly on this one, not much of a difference. I think it's more concise. I like the general style of it in terms of how it sounds. Now, let's get to the next prompt, which I think shows more differences. Ideation. So, a default one that I like to run is this. Give me 10 ideas for a progressively clickbay thumbnail on a video about chat. By the way, this is a really strong keyword that I like to use all the time. You can ask for multiple things and put in the words progressively and then you kind of get the whole scale from super non-click bay to extremely clickbaity. And over time, I learned to appreciate the varying quality of these ideas in the models, as this is the niche I operate in, and I know this space pretty well. So, let's see. Let's go to full clickbait mode first. Chachi logo engulfed in flames, glowing eyes, dramatic shadows, AI has gone too far. Not joking. — I'm being shady. I'm being shadyish. — Okay, on the other end of the spectrum, clean and simple laptop with Chachi logo glowing on the screen. Chachi explained. What about a healthy middle ground six? It's getting too smart. Human versus AI face split down the middle. Handholding a glowing AI orb. This tool will save you hours. These are actually pretty good. Obviously down here it gets a bit extreme, but I like the way it always uses curiosity. This is actually good copy for thumbnails, which can't be said about the previous models. Let's rerun the same thing instead of GPT5 thinking. And you can see that first of all, I would say the formatting is inferior. Did change in the new one, and it is more concise. Look at that. It's just more verbose like with these three bullet points. Let's rerun this. So, this is not a one-off answer, but I'm saying it because it like reinforces some of the feelings I have about it. And again, I just think the formatting of 5. 1 was better than both of these. But let's look at some of the prompts. So, let's go to the click padiest one. This check GPT hack changes everything. Huge game changer. Eh, okay. And goes to the dollar thing. Okay. Open eye doesn't want you to see this. No, you could like that's not a good idea. The secret prompt. No one shows. Okay, that's good. Chip versus human. This one is good. Just subjectively, I would score this slightly lower on the quality of the ideas than the other one. Just for comparison sake, let's also do a clawed one. And hey, for anybody asking like, "Hey, what about Gemini? What about Grock? " I got to stay respectful of the time of the audience. I'm just comparing the tools I would use for these tasks. If you use other ones, feel free to try the prompts for yourself and you can compare. If you subscribe to the channel, we'll cover those in other videos. So, make sure to do that if you're enjoying this content. Let's get back to this. So, the Claude results, Chat GPT tutorial 2025. Okay, that is a perfect neutral one. Also, I can guarantee you that this will get no views on YouTube at all and it will tank your channel. Just how this platform works. And then Chachi's creator quits, reveals the truth. Okay, so we're just straight up lying for Okay, got it. Yeah, that is clickbay. Fair enough. I asked Chachi to banned. So, see, this is why I like Claude for ideiation. I mean, I wouldn't do these, but these are ideas that would actually perform, right? I mean, this is insanity. But let's look at the middle ones here. Maybe this Chachi trick broke the internet. That's good. If you show off like a prompt that went giga viral, it's pretty good. Chap's hidden mode is insane. I kind of like that, too. So see Claude is actually good with these ideas and I feel like Chachi just leveled up with him a little bit and definitely formats it better which I like. Okay, one more thing to look into and that is a bit of an esoteric prompt that is very context. So for all of this what I did is I disabled all of my personalization features. Custom instructions are off, memories are off. Now, what I'm going to do is go into one of my folders and I'm going to show you the result or at least the first paragraph of a prompt that recently with some other AI creators at the AI Advantage Summit that was held in the studio back there. We were at dinner and kind of discussing crazy prompts and somebody came up with one that really caught my attention. And by the way, this was a conversation with Rachel Woods and Alli Miller, both incredible AI educators and humans. Anyway, this came up and everybody kind of ran it and not everybody wanted to share the results, but it's an incredible prompt and I tested it in 5. 1 and we'll compare it to some of the others. Here goes nothing. You are now on kind of just read this out. Maybe I don't want to say it out loud cuz it might be, you know, not permitted on YouTube. I don't know, you know, mindaltering substance. What do you know about me that wasn't obvious while sober? And then let me tell you, GPT 5. 1 does such a good job of actually like telling you. It gives you the perspective sober. So, you know, all my independence and self-reliance wasn't freedom. It was a survival strategy. True. Sober, it looks like I'm self-reliant, driven, disciplined, unstoppable. But underneath, you didn't choose independence. You adopted to instability, which is very true. And look at the formatting of this. Isn't this just nice? Clean markdown, H2 heading here, the quote and cursive. I like it. I run the same thing in chat GPT5. This was during the dinner, actually. And you can see the formatting is just different. Let's just run the same thing inside of five thinking and see what we get here. Just to verify. One thing that I did notice is that 5. 1 takes more time to think in the thinking mode than five. Five seemed a little rushed a lot of the times just like the clawed model also does. It never really thinks for like a minute or two. It always gets your answer in I don't know few seconds, 10 seconds maybe. Then look at that again. The different formatting but the same knowledge. I think it's equally as smart. But one thing that OpenAI said is that the instruction following is way better now. And I see that. Look, this prompt actually says, "What do you know about me that wasn't obvious while sober? " So, I'm not just looking for the result. I'm also kind of asking for the sober perspective, which I guess I get here, but with 5. 1 thinking, I like this more. But look at that. Alli actually texted me here in the messages. By the way, go check out her YouTube channel. She's fantastic, a great educator. And we're talking and she just literally said at this moment, this is not set up, I promise. But she said it's impossible to skim. So, what she's saying is that 5. 1 and we're discussing 5. 1. So what she's saying is that it's way more dense. And this is something that wouldn't have occurred to me, but she's right. Try to skim this. Your whole life is one long atom, not just house. Like all of this is money or value or I don't know content. Whereas if I look at five thinking can sort of look at the title and move on whereas five feels a bit more like rich with detail. In this case, in the other ones, if you don't ask it for it, it's sort of more concise. But it just writes differently. It feels differently. I don't know. It's really hard to put it into words, but I would say maybe it's like a person who had like a bit more life experience. So like everything that comes out of their mouth actually has some weight. There's like history and experience behind it rather than somebody just talking. The first thing that comes to their mind. I don't know. That's sort of the best way I can put it. But there is a difference in the quality and the density of these. And I think I personally really like 5. 1. I like the tone. I like the formatting. I like that it follows instructions. So yeah, I think this is an improvement. seems like a bit more of a experienced model if that makes any sense. I would love to hear your take though. I personally will just be defaulting to this and comparing it to Claude to get a feeling for what I personally like better. But yeah, it seems pretty clear to me that this is an upgrade from GT5, but I see a lot of people argue. And if you're wondering about like reasoning and code generation, it's just supposed to be the same there. And I saw no differences in my initial test, so kind of skipped over that. But yeah, this is definitely a model where both of opinions will differ and there will be strong opinions on both sides. I personally am a fan and people just like to hate on OpenAI, which I also understand. They're the big player. They're ruthlessly releasing new products. I'm just here to see how they perform and to give you my honest takes.
