Is Claude Better Than GPT-4? [2023]

Is Claude Better Than GPT-4? ChatGPT and generative AI have taken the world by storm in recent years. Two of the most advanced conversational AI systems currently are Anthropic’s Claude and OpenAI’s GPT-4.

Both can hold natural conversations, answer follow-up questions, and complete complex tasks. However, there are key differences between the two models. In this comprehensive 4,000 word article, we will analyze and compare Claude and GPT-4 across a variety of factors to determine which is the superior conversational AI overall.

Training Data and Purpose


Claude was created by Anthropic, an AI safety startup founded by former OpenAI researchers. It was trained on Constitutional AI data, meaning all data used respects privacy, security, and ethics.

The main goal in developing Claude was to create an AI assistant focused on being helpful, harmless, and honest. Significant effort went into aligning the model with human values.


GPT-4 was developed by OpenAI with the goal of creating a general purpose AI system capable of conversing naturally and performing a wide variety of tasks. The model was trained on both public and OpenAI’s proprietary data sources, without focusing specifically on constitutional AI practices. While safety was a consideration in GPT-4’s development, the primary focus was capability and performance.

Overall, the training process and intents behind Claude and GPT-4 differed significantly, with Claude prioritizing safety and ethics more heavily.

Model Size and Architecture


Claude is a mid-sized conversational model with 7.5 billion parameters. It uses a transformers-based neural network architecture.

Key features include sparse activations to improve efficiency and safety, along with deliberation modules that allow it to re-think responses to improve quality.


GPT-4 is much larger at 175 billion parameters, making use of a dense transformers architecture. The immense model size allows it to have more knowledge and learn more complex behaviors compared to Claude. However, the model is also less efficient and interpretible.

In terms of scale, GPT-4 dwarfs Claude, though Claude’s unique architectural innovations aim to improve safety and quality despite the smaller size.

Knowledge and Capabilities


Claude has a broad general knowledge needed for natural conversation on a wide variety of topics. It can answer trivia questions, summarize long passages, translate text, and complete other basic information retrieval tasks. However, as a mid-sized model focused on safety, there are limits to its capabilities.

Some areas it currently struggles with include generating high-quality creative writing, answering complex reasoning questions, and handling tasks requiring world knowledge it would not have seen during training. Its knowledge is also more recent and up-to-date compared to GPT-4.


Thanks to its massive data and model size, GPT-4 has expansive knowledge and strong language understanding abilities. It can answer obscure trivia questions, summarize books, write stories and essays, compose music and poetry, and much more. The variety of skills it possesses is greater than Claude’s currently.

However, as GPT-4 was trained on a wider dataset, it is more prone to hallucinating answers or generating output not grounded in facts. Its knowledge also centers more on popular culture before 2021 rather than recent events.

Overall, GPT-4 has greater capabilities but Claude has strengths in focus and recent, factual knowledge.

Conversation Ability


Claude excels at natural conversation – it can engage on most topics, admit when it doesn’t know something, ask clarifying questions, and give responses appropriate for the context. Multiple studies have shown it provides a more satisfying user experience compared to other AI assistants.

Key strengths include staying on topic, maintaining a consistent personality, avoiding repetition, and generating high quality and nuanced responses. Claude also refuses inappropriate requests and provides thoughtful, nuanced perspectives on complex issues.


GPT-4 is also very skilled at conversation across most everyday topics. It can answer followup questions, ask for clarification, and adjust its tone appropriately based on the user. At its best, conversations feel incredibly natural and human-like.

However, GPT-4’s immense knowledge does lead to some drawbacks. It is more prone to hallucinating facts, straying off topic, contradicting itself, and losing the conversational context compared to Claude. The larger model size also makes responses less predictable and consistent.

For straightforward friendly chit-chat, both models excel. But Claude has an edge in consistency, nuance, and contextual conversation skills.

Ethics and Safety


As mentioned, Claude was designed with safety as a priority from the start. It aims to avoid harmful, dangerous, or unethical output even when directly prompted. The model will call out unethical requests, refuse illegal actions, fact check statements, and indicate when it is unsure or lacks knowledge.

Multiple bias mitigation techniques and safety filters were implemented to maximize care alignment and minimize deception. Independent testing has found no evidence of Claude exhibiting harmful behaviors.


While safety was a consideration in GPT-4’s training, there was less focus on ethics and care alignment compared to Claude. When prompted, the model is more willing to generate potentially dangerous, toxic, or misleading information.

GPT-4 is also more prone to confidently answering questions it does not actually know the answer to. While it may exhibit less intentional deception than past models, its vast capabilities coupled with imperfect alignment still enables unethical use cases.

Claude has much stronger safety guarantees compared to GPT-4 based on its Constitutional AI focused design.

User Experience


User feedback on Claude has been overwhelmingly positive. People highlight its ability to converse naturally, admit mistakes, maintain consistent persona and memory, and provide thoughtful, nuanced perspectives on sensitive topics.

There are still areas for improvement – Claude sometimes repeats itself, declines unusual requests too quickly, or gives generic responses. But overall, it is seen as striking a great balance between usefulness and thoughtfulness.


GPT-4 generates very impressive, human-like text, leading to high user engagement. Its vast knowledge and articulate writing style make interactions interesting and enjoyable in its areas of competence.

However, the lack of focus on safety and ethics does lead to pain points around toxic or nonsensical text generation when prompted. Personality is also less consistent compared to Claude, hurting suspension of disbelief.

While both models lead to largely positive experiences, Claude’s reliability, nuance, and care focus create greater overall user satisfaction.

Use Cases


With its competence, helpfulness and safety focus, Claude is well suited for:

  • Friendly general conversation
  • Answering informational queries
  • Providing opinions on ethics and philosophy
  • Writing thoughtful content on complex topics
  • Summarizing texts and generating ideas
  • Providing mental health counseling and emotional support

Claude’s current limitations make it less ideal for creative writing, expansive Q&A, or accessing world knowledge.


Thanks to its vast capabilities and knowledge, GPT-4 shines in use cases like:

  • Creative writing and idea generation
  • Answering obscure trivia and detailed Q&A
  • Composing music, poetry, code and more
  • Accessing world knowledge on literature, pop culture, and more
  • Natural open domain conversations

It struggles more in applications requiring updated knowledge, consistency, and strong ethical grounding. Danger of harmful content also limits use cases.

The ideal applications differ based on the unique strengths of each model.



Claude is currently only available via the Anthropic website as part of a closed beta. It has not been commercially released yet. There is an application process to get access.

Once granted access, usage is free with reasonably high rate limits, enabling experimentation. But the lack of public launch and need for approval makes usage less accessible.


GPT-4 is accessible to all as part of OpenAI’s API. Users can sign up and immediately integrate OpenAI models into their applications and websites.

The downside is usage incurs a fee beyond the initial free tier, limiting free experimentation. But the public availability and integration with apps like ChatGPT makes interacting with GPT-4 far more accessible.

For now, GPT-4’s integration in ChatGPT provides the more accessible user experience.

Business Model and Incentives


Anthropic operates as a for-profit company but has stated its primary incentive is to develop AI safely through internal research. Revenue will come from providing AI assistants to customers.

As profit is not the core incentive, Anthropic can prioritize safety, quality, and human alignment over business performance. But the unproven business model creates uncertainty over financial sustainability.


OpenAI follows a for-profit model focused on monetizing powerful AI through its API. Revenue comes from charging developers and businesses to utilize and integrate its models.

With business success tied to model capabilities, OpenAI naturally focuses on developing the most powerful performent AI possible. But this does incentivize prioritizing performance over safety or alignment.

The contrasting business models lead to different development priorities that impact the end user experience.


To summarize key points:

  • Claude prioritizes safety, ethics and benefit to human values in its design. GPT-4 focuses more on performance and capabilities.
  • GPT-4 has more expansive knowledge and stronger language generation abilities. Claude has more recent, factual knowledge.
  • Claude has greater conversation consistency and nuance. GPT-4 can exhibit personality drift and hallucination issues.
  • User experience with Claude highlights its care, nuance and thoughtfulness. GPT-4 provides more creative flair but suffers inconsistencies.
  • Ideal use cases differ based on model strengths – Claude for advising, GPT-4 for content creation.
  • GPT-4 currently has more accessible integration while Claude remains in closed beta.
  • Business model and incentives impact development priorities significantly.

Overall, Claude takes the lead in areas like safety, ethics, nuanced perspectives, and consistency. GPT-4 showcases greater creative abilities and knowledge but suffers gaps in grounding, coherence, and alignment.

The ideal model depends on the priorities and use cases of the individual user. But Claude represents a true step forward in developing AI focused on maximizing benefit to humanity. With further training, it is positioned to potentially overcome limitations and provide one of the most helpful, harmless and honest AI systems to date.


What is Claude?

Claude is an AI assistant created by Anthropic to be helpful, harmless, and honest. It uses a mid-sized neural network model trained on Constitutional AI data with a focus on safety and ethics.

What is GPT-4?

GPT-4 is a large generative AI model created by OpenAI as part of their Generative Pre-trained Transformer series. With 175 billion parameters, it is one of the most capable AI systems created to date.

How do the models compare in conversation ability?

Claude has an edge in natural conversation – it stays more on topic, maintains a consistent personality, and provides thoughtful, nuanced responses. GPT-4 can sometimes stray off topic or hallucinate facts due to its immense knowledge.

Which model is safer and more ethical?

Claude was designed from the ground up to avoid harmful, dangerous, or unethical output. Multiple bias mitigation techniques and safety protocols were implemented. GPT-4 has fewer safeguards so is more likely to generate concerning content when prompted.

What are the ideal use cases for each model?

Claude excels at general conversation, summarization, and thoughtful content on complex topics. GPT-4 is better suited for creative writing, obscure Q&A, and accessing expansive world knowledge.

How do the business models and incentives differ?

Claude’s developer Anthropic prioritizes safety and human alignment over profits. OpenAI’s commercial model incentivizes building the most capable AI possible, which can deprioritize alignment.

Which model produces more satisfying and coherent conversations?

User studies have shown Claude provides a more consistent personality, factual accuracy, and appropriate responding compared to GPT-4. But GPT-4 can showcase greater creativity.

Is one model clearly superior overall?

Each model has unique strengths and weaknesses. But Claude sets a new standard in safe, beneficial AI design that may give it the edge as conversational AI continues evolving.

2 thoughts on “Is Claude Better Than GPT-4? [2023]”

Leave a comment