Viqus Logo Viqus Logo
Home
Categories
Language Models Generative Imagery Hardware & Chips Business & Funding Ethics & Society Science & Robotics
Resources
AI Glossary Academy CLI Tool Labs
About Contact

AI Giants Clash: Gemini vs. ChatGPT in a Quirky Test

AI OpenAI Google ChatGPT Gemini Artificial Intelligence Comparison
January 21, 2026
Viqus Verdict Logo Viqus Verdict Logo 7
Trial by Fire
Media Hype 6/10
Real Impact 7/10

Article Summary

A recent comparative test conducted by Ars Technica aimed to assess the current performance of Google's Gemini and OpenAI's ChatGPT 5.2, utilizing a set of diverse prompts. The tests covered areas ranging from generating dad jokes to crafting a historical narrative about Abraham Lincoln inventing basketball and providing a brief biography of Ars Technica editor Kyle Orland. While both models demonstrated competence in certain areas, particularly in mathematical calculations and creative writing, they also revealed inconsistencies and occasional misunderstandings. Gemini frequently generated verbatim responses from r/dadjokes, while ChatGPT occasionally produced illogical punchlines. Both models struggled with maintaining consistent units of measurement and exhibiting a deep understanding of the prompts' intent. Despite these shortcomings, Gemini’s clearer explanations and organized approach often surpassed ChatGPT’s occasionally convoluted reasoning. The test highlights the ongoing evolution of generative AI, showcasing both its potential and its current limitations.

Key Points

  • Gemini and ChatGPT consistently struggled with originality, particularly in generating original dad jokes, often finding similar content online.
  • Despite occasional errors in calculations and explanations, Gemini frequently provided clearer and more organized responses compared to ChatGPT.
  • The test highlighted the ongoing challenges faced by both models in truly understanding and responding to complex prompts, revealing differences in their reasoning processes.

Why It Matters

This article matters because it offers a practical, hands-on demonstration of the current state of large language models. While these models are impressive, they're not yet consistently reliable or intelligent. This test provides valuable insight for anyone interested in the development and future of AI, demonstrating that even the most advanced models still require refinement. Furthermore, the fact that the models were tested by a respected tech publication adds weight to the findings, signaling a critical assessment of the technology.

You might also be interested in