Stop Using ChatGPT: I Tested 5 AI Tools and THIS One BEATS Them All

Chad, GPT, Claude, Gemini, Grock, Kimik 2. Five AI models, one winner. I put every major AI model through 10 different tests, from writing emails to building apps to finally answering the question everyone's asking. Which one is actually worth your money? I'm not just testing one thing. We're going full spectrum. Everyday tasks, content creation, coding challenges, and learning. 10 ultimate tests to tell which model is better. And in the last three tests, we will push the boundaries to see which model keeps standing and which ones give up. But do not miss the 10th test. It will truly shock you. By the end of this video, you will know based on your use cases exactly which ones you need to pay for. Let's start with what you actually use AI for every day.

Chad, GPT, Claude, Gemini, Grock, Kimik 2. Five AI models, one winner. I put every major AI model through 10 different tests, from writing emails to building apps to finally answering the question everyone's asking. Which one is actually worth your money? I'm not just testing one thing. We're going full spectrum. Everyday tasks, content creation, coding challenges, and learning. 10 ultimate tests to tell which model is better. And in the last three tests, we will push the boundaries to see which model keeps standing and which ones give up. But do not miss the 10th test. It will truly shock you. By the end of this video, you will know based on your use cases exactly which ones you need to pay for. Let's start with what you actually use AI for every day.

By the way, I'm dropping all 10 prompts from this video in my free WhatsApp community. Almost every day, I drop the latest AI updates, tools, workflows. Everything I find goes there first. So seriously, don't miss out. Links in the description. This video is sponsored by Multi. More on them later.

By the way, I'm dropping all 10 prompts from this video in my free WhatsApp community. Almost every day, I drop the latest AI updates, tools, workflows. Everything I find goes there first. So seriously, don't miss out. Links in the description. This video is sponsored by Multi. More on them later.

All right, so the first test we're doing is writing an email. Can these AI models actually write like a human? We're testing tone, clarity, and professionalism across all five models. I've got my prompt ready. Same exact prompt going into all five models to keep this fair. Here's the test. Write a LinkedIn message to a hiring manager at Google. I'm a marketing pro with 5 years of experience trying to break into tech. Make it personal, not salesy. In chat GPT, I'm using GPT 5. 1. For Claude, I'm using Claude Sonet 4. 5, which is their smartest for everyday tasks. In Gemini, I'm using Thinking with 3 Pro. That's their Gemini 3 Pro model with extended reasoning. For Grock, I'm using Gro 4. 1, which is their latest model. And in Kimmy, I'm using Kimmy K2. That's their flagship model. Kimy's ready. Let me paste the prompt and hit enter on all five at once. Let's start the first test and see who wins. Everyone's got their output. Let's break it down. Chat GPT first. Chat GPT's output is pretty concise. It's aligned with how I'd actually write. Not bad. Now, let's check Claude. Okay, Claude gave us a subject line, which is nice, but it starts with, "I hope this message finds you well. " Way too generic. We said, "Make it personal, not salesy. " and Claude went the traditional corporate route. All right, let's see Gemini. Gemini gave us three different options. This is nice. We don't have to reprompt Gemini for multiple options. It just gave us variety right out the gate. And check this out. It explains why each option works. Option one is the super user approach. Option two is common ground. Option three is direct and humble. Each one comes with strategy notes. Plus, it gave us subject lines for each version. So far, this is the best output I've seen. Let me read option one. Hi, I've been following the recent updates. Yeah, this actually sounds like something a real person would write. All three options look really solid. All right, now let's look at Grock. Grock gave us a massive paragraph. This is a lot of text. Nobody wants to read a message this long in 2025. This is definitely not winning on length or readability. Last one. Kimmy. Okay, Kimmy missed the subject line and it went pretty traditional, too. But wait, it's asking, "Why would an HR manager lead a marketing effort? " Kimmy totally misunderstood the prompt. We said, "I'm a marketing professional trying to get into tech, not that I'm an HR person doing marketing. " So, this round, the clear winner is Gemini. Gemini wins on tone accuracy. 100%. Length, not too long, not too short. Perfect. And the big question, would I actually send this? Yes, 100%. I'd use Gemini's email because I've got three solid options to pick from. One test down, four more sections to go. Let's see if Gemini can keep this lead.

All right, so the first test we're doing is writing an email. Can these AI models actually write like a human? We're testing tone, clarity, and professionalism across all five models. I've got my prompt ready. Same exact prompt going into all five models to keep this fair. Here's the test. Write a LinkedIn message to a hiring manager at Google. I'm a marketing pro with 5 years of experience trying to break into tech. Make it personal, not salesy. In chat GPT, I'm using GPT 5. 1. For Claude, I'm using Claude Sonet 4. 5, which is their smartest for everyday tasks. In Gemini, I'm using Thinking with 3 Pro. That's their Gemini 3 Pro model with extended reasoning. For Grock, I'm using Gro 4. 1, which is their latest model. And in Kimmy, I'm using Kimmy K2. That's their flagship model. Kimy's ready. Let me paste the prompt and hit enter on all five at once. Let's start the first test and see who wins. Everyone's got their output. Let's break it down. Chat GPT first. Chat GPT's output is pretty concise. It's aligned with how I'd actually write. Not bad. Now, let's check Claude. Okay, Claude gave us a subject line, which is nice, but it starts with, "I hope this message finds you well. " Way too generic. We said, "Make it personal, not salesy. " and Claude went the traditional corporate route. All right, let's see Gemini. Gemini gave us three different options. This is nice. We don't have to reprompt Gemini for multiple options. It just gave us variety right out the gate. And check this out. It explains why each option works. Option one is the super user approach. Option two is common ground. Option three is direct and humble. Each one comes with strategy notes. Plus, it gave us subject lines for each version. So far, this is the best output I've seen. Let me read option one. Hi, I've been following the recent updates. Yeah, this actually sounds like something a real person would write. All three options look really solid. All right, now let's look at Grock. Grock gave us a massive paragraph. This is a lot of text. Nobody wants to read a message this long in 2025. This is definitely not winning on length or readability. Last one. Kimmy. Okay, Kimmy missed the subject line and it went pretty traditional, too. But wait, it's asking, "Why would an HR manager lead a marketing effort? " Kimmy totally misunderstood the prompt. We said, "I'm a marketing professional trying to get into tech, not that I'm an HR person doing marketing. " So, this round, the clear winner is Gemini. Gemini wins on tone accuracy. 100%. Length, not too long, not too short. Perfect. And the big question, would I actually send this? Yes, 100%. I'd use Gemini's email because I've got three solid options to pick from. One test down, four more sections to go. Let's see if Gemini can keep this lead.

Okay, let's start another test. Can it improve your writing without losing your voice? Did it actually improve the text? Did it preserve the original intent? And did it overedit it or just right? I have my prompt ready. I'm going to be pasting it in all these models. Let's hit enter. Cool. Charge GPT is running so fast, it has already given us the answer. Gemini is way ahead, too. Let's analyze the answers. Chpt shortened it and added extra annoying. Claude also tightened it, kept it casual but more neutral. I'm not sure if anyone has won here yet. Let's check Gemini. Oh, it has again given us two options. And the best part, it's asking us, do you want me to make it more formal? The two options just makes one prompt effort better. Grock hasn't given any reasoning and it says my damn wallet and pissed me off. Wait, I don't think it has shortened it. It just rephrased and added words I never said. Kimmy has given us concise answer but no reasoning. This test is very hard to define which one has won but definitely Grock hasn't won because Gemini has given us two outputs and explained what changes it made. Gemini 3 Pro is clearly standing out here. I won't say the winner but standing out.

Okay, let's start another test. Can it improve your writing without losing your voice? Did it actually improve the text? Did it preserve the original intent? And did it overedit it or just right? I have my prompt ready. I'm going to be pasting it in all these models. Let's hit enter. Cool. Charge GPT is running so fast, it has already given us the answer. Gemini is way ahead, too. Let's analyze the answers. Chpt shortened it and added extra annoying. Claude also tightened it, kept it casual but more neutral. I'm not sure if anyone has won here yet. Let's check Gemini. Oh, it has again given us two options. And the best part, it's asking us, do you want me to make it more formal? The two options just makes one prompt effort better. Grock hasn't given any reasoning and it says my damn wallet and pissed me off. Wait, I don't think it has shortened it. It just rephrased and added words I never said. Kimmy has given us concise answer but no reasoning. This test is very hard to define which one has won but definitely Grock hasn't won because Gemini has given us two outputs and explained what changes it made. Gemini 3 Pro is clearly standing out here. I won't say the winner but standing out.

Okay, so now we are doing the daily task test. I'll paste the prompt in all five models. Suggest five side hustle ideas. I'm a content writer. Have 10 hours per week. need realistic income. Judging on how original the idea is, how actionable and variety chat GPT is really fast. GPT has organized it very properly. Part-wise, five parts. Claude is very textheavy, hard to read. But Claude has a little more depth. It has recommended which tools you might need like convert kit. Cool. Both stand on same format. Now let's check Gemini. The hero of our last two experiments. The best part, it has focused on the time schedule which we clearly mentioned 10 hours per week. It has focused on my available time. So that is where it is standing out. The AI humanizer and content polisher. If you have observed the last two outputs, they haven't even mentioned AI anywhere. The concept companies are flooding with AI content. But it sounds robotic. Your service is humanizing their AI drafts. Actually true. This side hustle is very much aligned to today's market condition, not based on old data. Cool. The SAS case study specialist. Software companies are desperate for social proof. You interview their clients and write success stories. Why it works? One case study can be worth thousands and I have seen this. Real reviews from happy customers has driven me cres of business. This advice clearly makes sense. Fourth, ghostriter for boring industries. Everyone tries to be ghostwriter for tech CEOs. I get tons of DMs every day, so I know the pain. The real money with less competition is logistics, manufacturing. These founders have money but zero time. Clearly makes sense. Now grock LinkedIn ghost writing for tech founders which Gemini clearly said this market is crowded. It hasn't given any detail just this is the thing you can do it. I am not very impressed. Now Kimmy social media hook factory. Now this is something which is crazy. In social media the thing which drives reach is hook. If you specialize only in writing attention-grabbing opening hooks, creators will hire you because you're driving huge growth and it has given how to start. Analyze our viral content, create swipe file of 100 winning hooks, offer free rewrites to build testimonials. That is a good way. So definitely Gemini comes on top.

Okay, so now we are doing the daily task test. I'll paste the prompt in all five models. Suggest five side hustle ideas. I'm a content writer. Have 10 hours per week. need realistic income. Judging on how original the idea is, how actionable and variety chat GPT is really fast. GPT has organized it very properly. Part-wise, five parts. Claude is very textheavy, hard to read. But Claude has a little more depth. It has recommended which tools you might need like convert kit. Cool. Both stand on same format. Now let's check Gemini. The hero of our last two experiments. The best part, it has focused on the time schedule which we clearly mentioned 10 hours per week. It has focused on my available time. So that is where it is standing out. The AI humanizer and content polisher. If you have observed the last two outputs, they haven't even mentioned AI anywhere. The concept companies are flooding with AI content. But it sounds robotic. Your service is humanizing their AI drafts. Actually true. This side hustle is very much aligned to today's market condition, not based on old data. Cool. The SAS case study specialist. Software companies are desperate for social proof. You interview their clients and write success stories. Why it works? One case study can be worth thousands and I have seen this. Real reviews from happy customers has driven me cres of business. This advice clearly makes sense. Fourth, ghostriter for boring industries. Everyone tries to be ghostwriter for tech CEOs. I get tons of DMs every day, so I know the pain. The real money with less competition is logistics, manufacturing. These founders have money but zero time. Clearly makes sense. Now grock LinkedIn ghost writing for tech founders which Gemini clearly said this market is crowded. It hasn't given any detail just this is the thing you can do it. I am not very impressed. Now Kimmy social media hook factory. Now this is something which is crazy. In social media the thing which drives reach is hook. If you specialize only in writing attention-grabbing opening hooks, creators will hire you because you're driving huge growth and it has given how to start. Analyze our viral content, create swipe file of 100 winning hooks, offer free rewrites to build testimonials. That is a good way. So definitely Gemini comes on top.

Okay. So now we are ready for the next test. Learning something new. We are testing the teaching ability. Can they make complex ideas simple? We're looking for clear, accurate, and engaging explanations. Here's my prompt. Explain how AI like Chat GPT actually works. I'm not technical. Use analogies. I want to understand what happens when I type a question. Chad GPT says, imagine you're talking to a very fast, very well- read parrot with a great memory for patterns. It learned by reading millions of books, but instead of memorizing them, it learned patterns. When you ask a question, it predicts the next word, one word at a time. Next when we come to Gemini our all-time king as of now it has given us really good analogies. It says AI is essentially a massive prediction machine. The education the library approach the answer superpowered autocomplete like your phone suggests next word and the chef analogy chat GPT as a master chef. The ingredients are the words you type. The recipe is the patterns it learned. The meal is the answer it creates. It's time for Grock to shine. Imagine you walk into a gigantic library with a magical librarian who has memorized everything. Your sentence gets broken into tokens. Think of them as Lego bricks of language. Here's the weird part. The AI has amnesia. It has no persistent memory of what it said a second ago. Kimmy as well has given us a lot of big paragraphs. Your question gets chopped into Lego bricks. The frozen stew of patterns. The attention spotlight. Actually to be honest, Kimmy has broken down the complete process a lot which was the standing part from every other model. Cool. So for teaching ability, Gemini wins with the best analogies. Library, autocomplete, chef really made it click. Grock had good stuff too with the amnesia part, but the winner is Gemini 3 Pro.

Okay. So now we are ready for the next test. Learning something new. We are testing the teaching ability. Can they make complex ideas simple? We're looking for clear, accurate, and engaging explanations. Here's my prompt. Explain how AI like Chat GPT actually works. I'm not technical. Use analogies. I want to understand what happens when I type a question. Chad GPT says, imagine you're talking to a very fast, very well- read parrot with a great memory for patterns. It learned by reading millions of books, but instead of memorizing them, it learned patterns. When you ask a question, it predicts the next word, one word at a time. Next when we come to Gemini our all-time king as of now it has given us really good analogies. It says AI is essentially a massive prediction machine. The education the library approach the answer superpowered autocomplete like your phone suggests next word and the chef analogy chat GPT as a master chef. The ingredients are the words you type. The recipe is the patterns it learned. The meal is the answer it creates. It's time for Grock to shine. Imagine you walk into a gigantic library with a magical librarian who has memorized everything. Your sentence gets broken into tokens. Think of them as Lego bricks of language. Here's the weird part. The AI has amnesia. It has no persistent memory of what it said a second ago. Kimmy as well has given us a lot of big paragraphs. Your question gets chopped into Lego bricks. The frozen stew of patterns. The attention spotlight. Actually to be honest, Kimmy has broken down the complete process a lot which was the standing part from every other model. Cool. So for teaching ability, Gemini wins with the best analogies. Library, autocomplete, chef really made it click. Grock had good stuff too with the amnesia part, but the winner is Gemini 3 Pro.

Now, if you're still confused after all these tests, like which model is actually best for your specific use case, and you want to compare them side by side yourself, that's where today's sponsor, Multi, comes in. Once you're in, you can choose from tons of different models. Okay, so let's do a LinkedIn post test. I'll load up the same models we've been using. GPT 5. 1, Gemini 3 Pro, Claude Sonet, but let's try Opus this time, and Grock 4. 1 fast. Here's our prompt. Write a LinkedIn post with a controversial but defensible opinion. Let's see what happens. So, Multi is running all four simultaneously. And look, Claude Opus 4. 5 finished first, then Grock, then Gemini 3 Pro, and GPT 5. 1 came in last. Let's look at the outputs. Claude, unpopular opinion. Remote work doesn't kill culture, bad managers do. Grock, bold take. Remote work is a productivity trap disguised as freedom. Gemini, fully remote work creates a massive career ceiling for entry-level employees. All three understand what works on LinkedIn. GPT 5. 1 hot take remote work is great for companies but bad for most ethical professionals. It's concise but feels a bit robotic probably because of the 200word limit. For me, Claude Opus 4. 5 won this one. Gemini 3 Pro second, GPT 5. 13rd, Grock 4. 14. But yeah, as you could see, using Multi was a great experience. It is so easy to use. It's very fast. It's beautiful. So, if you want to run tests like this yourself, check out Multi atmulti. ai. link in description.

Now, if you're still confused after all these tests, like which model is actually best for your specific use case, and you want to compare them side by side yourself, that's where today's sponsor, Multi, comes in. Once you're in, you can choose from tons of different models. Okay, so let's do a LinkedIn post test. I'll load up the same models we've been using. GPT 5. 1, Gemini 3 Pro, Claude Sonet, but let's try Opus this time, and Grock 4. 1 fast. Here's our prompt. Write a LinkedIn post with a controversial but defensible opinion. Let's see what happens. So, Multi is running all four simultaneously. And look, Claude Opus 4. 5 finished first, then Grock, then Gemini 3 Pro, and GPT 5. 1 came in last. Let's look at the outputs. Claude, unpopular opinion. Remote work doesn't kill culture, bad managers do. Grock, bold take. Remote work is a productivity trap disguised as freedom. Gemini, fully remote work creates a massive career ceiling for entry-level employees. All three understand what works on LinkedIn. GPT 5. 1 hot take remote work is great for companies but bad for most ethical professionals. It's concise but feels a bit robotic probably because of the 200word limit. For me, Claude Opus 4. 5 won this one. Gemini 3 Pro second, GPT 5. 13rd, Grock 4. 14. But yeah, as you could see, using Multi was a great experience. It is so easy to use. It's very fast. It's beautiful. So, if you want to run tests like this yourself, check out Multi atmulti. ai. link in description.

Now, let's see their image generation capabilities. Claude doesn't have image generation, nor does Kimmy, but Gemini has Nano Banana Pro. Chat GPT has its image generation, and Grock has Aurora. So, let's test the prompt. Create an Instagram worthy infographic about five morning habits of successful people. Use dark theme with neon accents. Modern, clean, sharable. Okay, so Gemini has given up. It's saying something went wrong while Grock was very fast and it has given us a ton of outputs to use from and these outputs are crazy good. Just see the graphic design. It's actually standing out. Now let's look at chat GPD's results. Although the text is good but it's pretty basic. Cool. Now let's get back to Gemini once more with Nano Banana Pro. And this time Gemini has given us an output. Although the text are good but it's very basic. Let me retry. Okay. I was thinking that Grock's output must be the best but Gemini has actually surprised me. As you can see, it has added all the billionaires pictures, Jeff Bezos, Mark Zuckerberg, and it has also added icons, text, and some explanation as well. Gemini has made it Instagram worthy. I still think we will have to do some improvement, but yeah, this is a good output. It's definitely usable. So, Chad GPT gave us a good but generic result. Grock gave tons of options and crazy good design. But Gemini's final output with the billionaire pictures and explanations that's actually usable. Winner, Gemini's Nano Banana Pro.

Now, let's see their image generation capabilities. Claude doesn't have image generation, nor does Kimmy, but Gemini has Nano Banana Pro. Chat GPT has its image generation, and Grock has Aurora. So, let's test the prompt. Create an Instagram worthy infographic about five morning habits of successful people. Use dark theme with neon accents. Modern, clean, sharable. Okay, so Gemini has given up. It's saying something went wrong while Grock was very fast and it has given us a ton of outputs to use from and these outputs are crazy good. Just see the graphic design. It's actually standing out. Now let's look at chat GPD's results. Although the text is good but it's pretty basic. Cool. Now let's get back to Gemini once more with Nano Banana Pro. And this time Gemini has given us an output. Although the text are good but it's very basic. Let me retry. Okay. I was thinking that Grock's output must be the best but Gemini has actually surprised me. As you can see, it has added all the billionaires pictures, Jeff Bezos, Mark Zuckerberg, and it has also added icons, text, and some explanation as well. Gemini has made it Instagram worthy. I still think we will have to do some improvement, but yeah, this is a good output. It's definitely usable. So, Chad GPT gave us a good but generic result. Grock gave tons of options and crazy good design. But Gemini's final output with the billionaire pictures and explanations that's actually usable. Winner, Gemini's Nano Banana Pro.

Okay, enough with the small experiments. Now it's time to build something. Here is where it gets interesting. Can these AI actually build things for people who don't know how to code? This is not for developers. This is for people from marketing background or some other background who have like literally zero context of how to code but they have some ideas which they want to build. What we are testing is can a non-coder get a working tool with zero coding experience. So let's make a pomodoro timer. I have my prompt ready and I'm going to be pasting them directly here. So everyone is creating uh cloud has already created it. GPT just started creating it. Gemini has also created it. Grock has created it. We will have to click on preview. Okay, so GPT finally delivered the code after keeping me waiting. But here's the catch. I can't actually preview it. So I ran a few more prompts asking GPT to give me a preview. And you know what? It actually delivered. Design-wise, GPT has killed it. The UX is solid, too. Focus print working, pause button, skip button that transitions between focus and break. This is genuinely well done. But Claude has given us although Claude is very biased for this purple color. Okay. The best thing I think Gemini has given us one of the best output. Work mode has a different color. Brake chill vibe. You can start it will start focusing. You can reset it. Cool. So I definitely love the Gemini's output at the same time. Actually surprised with the Gro's output as well. It's very clean, minimal. Although Gro's output is pretty basic, but at least you are getting the preview which GPT was not providing. Kimmy everything is completely messed up. The orientation is messed up. Alignment is messed up. Visually, it's bad, but it's working. Cool. So, this was the builder test.

Okay, enough with the small experiments. Now it's time to build something. Here is where it gets interesting. Can these AI actually build things for people who don't know how to code? This is not for developers. This is for people from marketing background or some other background who have like literally zero context of how to code but they have some ideas which they want to build. What we are testing is can a non-coder get a working tool with zero coding experience. So let's make a pomodoro timer. I have my prompt ready and I'm going to be pasting them directly here. So everyone is creating uh cloud has already created it. GPT just started creating it. Gemini has also created it. Grock has created it. We will have to click on preview. Okay, so GPT finally delivered the code after keeping me waiting. But here's the catch. I can't actually preview it. So I ran a few more prompts asking GPT to give me a preview. And you know what? It actually delivered. Design-wise, GPT has killed it. The UX is solid, too. Focus print working, pause button, skip button that transitions between focus and break. This is genuinely well done. But Claude has given us although Claude is very biased for this purple color. Okay. The best thing I think Gemini has given us one of the best output. Work mode has a different color. Brake chill vibe. You can start it will start focusing. You can reset it. Cool. So I definitely love the Gemini's output at the same time. Actually surprised with the Gro's output as well. It's very clean, minimal. Although Gro's output is pretty basic, but at least you are getting the preview which GPT was not providing. Kimmy everything is completely messed up. The orientation is messed up. Alignment is messed up. Visually, it's bad, but it's working. Cool. So, this was the builder test.

test. So, next test, resume red flag scanner. We are testing real world professional utility and attention to detail. In this test, we are uploading a resume with intentional red flags, employment gaps, job hopping, vague descriptions, typos. Let's give a prompt. Review this resume as if you're a hiring manager. Find every red flag. be brutally honest. So, let's do it. Chat GPT has given brutally honest hiring manager style review. It has actually found the major red flags. It's a professional summary. February typos and headers are an instant deal breaker for many hiring managers. Extremely unrealistic claims increased revenue by 300%. Built revolutionary AI algorithms. Claude has also given us really good found the critical typos such as professional summary opportunity fib. Gemini has also given us a really good output. It's given us strength and depth that honestly Gemini just can't match but it has given us what's actually required. Grock has also given us really good output and it's really in-depth. Kimmy but it's not that great. It is good. I think these four models have actually stand out. Chat GPT, Claude, Grock, Gemini. But like all these four models has given really good output neck to neck. Hard to choose who to go with.

test. So, next test, resume red flag scanner. We are testing real world professional utility and attention to detail. In this test, we are uploading a resume with intentional red flags, employment gaps, job hopping, vague descriptions, typos. Let's give a prompt. Review this resume as if you're a hiring manager. Find every red flag. be brutally honest. So, let's do it. Chat GPT has given brutally honest hiring manager style review. It has actually found the major red flags. It's a professional summary. February typos and headers are an instant deal breaker for many hiring managers. Extremely unrealistic claims increased revenue by 300%. Built revolutionary AI algorithms. Claude has also given us really good found the critical typos such as professional summary opportunity fib. Gemini has also given us a really good output. It's given us strength and depth that honestly Gemini just can't match but it has given us what's actually required. Grock has also given us really good output and it's really in-depth. Kimmy but it's not that great. It is good. I think these four models have actually stand out. Chat GPT, Claude, Grock, Gemini. But like all these four models has given really good output neck to neck. Hard to choose who to go with.

Let's start with testing their visual intelligence as in image analysis and attention to detail. Here's the prompt I gave. Compare these two thumbnails and analyze the differences in design, colors, text, layout. Highlight what works better and why. I'm uploading two completely different YouTube thumbnails. One is super clean, the other is a bit chaotic. Let's see if they can actually tell us which one gets more clicks. Pasting the prompt. Let's go. Chat GPT first. It's breaking down layout colors. Strong center focused for thumbnail one. More complex structure. Three faces. Bold headline for thumbnail two. Nice. It gave us a sideby-side summary table. Final verdict. Thumbnail two is better for emotional pull. Thumbnail one is better for professional clarity. It even suggests improvements. Solid. Let's try Claude next. According to Claude, overall winner is image one. Claude's going with the cleaner look. Professional polish, clean design, brand consistency. Okay, Claude played it safe here. Now Gemini are king so far. Highlevel overview first, then detailed analysis, layout, colors, text strategy. This is interesting. Provocative statement. Google just one is clickbait in a strategic way. And the verdict for click-through rate and broad appeal. Thumbnail two, it captures FOMO, but for search and utility, thumbnail one. This is a very nuanced take. Gemini actually understands the intent behind each thumbnail. This is smart. It's time for Grock. It shows the images at the top with a table comparison. Verdict: Thumbnail 2 wins decisively. Extreme emotional contrast. Visual proof. It tells a complete dramatic story in one image. Grock is very confident. No hesitation. And then Kimmy comparative analysis by element. What may not work? Thumbnail two, the logo looks sloppy. Okay, Kim is being critical of the design elements. Fair points, but nothing groundbreaking. So, here's my take. Gemini gave the best strategic advice differentiating between broad appeal CTR versus utility. That's actually useful. Chad GPT was solid with the table format. Grock had a strong opinion on storytelling. Claude played it safe. Kimmy was just okay.

Let's start with testing their visual intelligence as in image analysis and attention to detail. Here's the prompt I gave. Compare these two thumbnails and analyze the differences in design, colors, text, layout. Highlight what works better and why. I'm uploading two completely different YouTube thumbnails. One is super clean, the other is a bit chaotic. Let's see if they can actually tell us which one gets more clicks. Pasting the prompt. Let's go. Chat GPT first. It's breaking down layout colors. Strong center focused for thumbnail one. More complex structure. Three faces. Bold headline for thumbnail two. Nice. It gave us a sideby-side summary table. Final verdict. Thumbnail two is better for emotional pull. Thumbnail one is better for professional clarity. It even suggests improvements. Solid. Let's try Claude next. According to Claude, overall winner is image one. Claude's going with the cleaner look. Professional polish, clean design, brand consistency. Okay, Claude played it safe here. Now Gemini are king so far. Highlevel overview first, then detailed analysis, layout, colors, text strategy. This is interesting. Provocative statement. Google just one is clickbait in a strategic way. And the verdict for click-through rate and broad appeal. Thumbnail two, it captures FOMO, but for search and utility, thumbnail one. This is a very nuanced take. Gemini actually understands the intent behind each thumbnail. This is smart. It's time for Grock. It shows the images at the top with a table comparison. Verdict: Thumbnail 2 wins decisively. Extreme emotional contrast. Visual proof. It tells a complete dramatic story in one image. Grock is very confident. No hesitation. And then Kimmy comparative analysis by element. What may not work? Thumbnail two, the logo looks sloppy. Okay, Kim is being critical of the design elements. Fair points, but nothing groundbreaking. So, here's my take. Gemini gave the best strategic advice differentiating between broad appeal CTR versus utility. That's actually useful. Chad GPT was solid with the table format. Grock had a strong opinion on storytelling. Claude played it safe. Kimmy was just okay.

okay. All right, we've done the everyday stuff. Now, let's see which AI can handle the hard stuff. It's time for the final challenge. Here's the prompt. Create a futuristic voice first Android OS for computer. Completely optimized for audio interaction. This is complex. Let's see who survives. Pasting it. Let's go. Okay. Wow. Gemini has already created it. Android 3. 0. Let me initialize the system. Wow, it's speaking. It actually added audio and it's waiting for me to respond. That's crazy. Let me test it. Everything is working. The voice commands aren't triggering audio responses yet, but the UI is responding. Impressive start. Grock has also created something Vera OS. Let's see what it does now. Claude, this is clean. Time display, calendar, email summary builtin. Let me try open notepad. It works. Claude's giving us a really polished UI here. And next up, chat GPD 5. 1. But wait, it ran into a syntax error. Let me ask it to fix. Okay, it's back. Echo OS voice first Android. Let's see if it actually works now. Now the real test audio listening. Let me ask them to add a visualizer. Gemini implemented a fallback mechanism. If microphone permission is denied, it switches to simulation mode. That's actually smart. Thinking ahead, Claude, I clicked the mic button, but I don't think it's actually working. No response. So, here's where we stand. Gemini gave us the best UI clean functional. Actually thought about edge

okay. All right, we've done the everyday stuff. Now, let's see which AI can handle the hard stuff. It's time for the final challenge. Here's the prompt. Create a futuristic voice first Android OS for computer. Completely optimized for audio interaction. This is complex. Let's see who survives. Pasting it. Let's go. Okay. Wow. Gemini has already created it. Android 3. 0. Let me initialize the system. Wow, it's speaking. It actually added audio and it's waiting for me to respond. That's crazy. Let me test it. Everything is working. The voice commands aren't triggering audio responses yet, but the UI is responding. Impressive start. Grock has also created something Vera OS. Let's see what it does now. Claude, this is clean. Time display, calendar, email summary builtin. Let me try open notepad. It works. Claude's giving us a really polished UI here. And next up, chat GPD 5. 1. But wait, it ran into a syntax error. Let me ask it to fix. Okay, it's back. Echo OS voice first Android. Let's see if it actually works now. Now the real test audio listening. Let me ask them to add a visualizer. Gemini implemented a fallback mechanism. If microphone permission is denied, it switches to simulation mode. That's actually smart. Thinking ahead, Claude, I clicked the mic button, but I don't think it's actually working. No response. So, here's where we stand. Gemini gave us the best UI clean functional. Actually thought about edge

cases. All right, let's count down the final rankings. In last place, Kimmy K2. Coming in fourth, we've got Grock 4. 1. Third place goes to Chat GPT 5. 1. In second, it's Claude Sonic 3. 5. And taking the crown once again at number one, Gemini 3 Pro. So after 10 tests, Gemini 3 Pro is the clear winner. Claude is solid for coding. Grock surprised me with images. Chad GPT needs more prompting but delivers. And Kimmy, skip it. But honestly, try them yourself. That's why I showed you multi earlier. All 10 prompts are in my WhatsApp community link in description. Join it. If this helped, subscribe. See you in the next one.

cases. All right, let's count down the final rankings. In last place, Kimmy K2. Coming in fourth, we've got Grock 4. 1. Third place goes to Chat GPT 5. 1. In second, it's Claude Sonic 3. 5. And taking the crown once again at number one, Gemini 3 Pro. So after 10 tests, Gemini 3 Pro is the clear winner. Claude is solid for coding. Grock surprised me with images. Chad GPT needs more prompting but delivers. And Kimmy, skip it. But honestly, try them yourself. That's why I showed you multi earlier. All 10 prompts are in my WhatsApp community link in description. Join it. If this helped, subscribe. See you in the next one.