From news to practice.
Start from the task you have to accomplish: documents, research, code, or teamwork. Compare assistants on that basis, checking features and plan conditions.
| Assistant | What distinguishes the offer | What to check |
|---|---|---|
| ChatGPT | Conversation, research and content production in a broad environment. | Active model, available tools and plan limitations. |
| Gemini | Multimodal assistant in the Google ecosystem. | Links to apps, permissions and account type. |
| Claude | Analysis and creation of works, with Artifacts and tools for code. | Availability of tools and quality on one’s own document type. |
| Microsoft Copilot | Assistance in Microsoft 365 work applications. | Specific Copilot product, licence and data access. |
| Perplexity | Web search and answers with references to original documents. | Source quality and correspondence between citation and statement. |
| Mistral Vibe, formerly Le Chat | Assistant and tools in an ecosystem also oriented to customisation. | Hosted service or enterprise solution: conditions and data control. |
| DeepSeek | Chat and programmatic access to a family of models. | Version, mode of use and service conditions. |
First distinction: the assistant is not the model
ChatGPT, Gemini and Claude are often simply called “the AI”, but an assistant includes much more than the model generating responses. It matters whether it can search the web, read files, create works or access authorised applications. The same service can offer different models and tools depending on plan, account and geographic area. This comparison describes official offerings as of the indicated date: it is neither a lab test nor a performance ranking.
ChatGPT — A generalist environment for questions, content and work
ChatGPT is OpenAI’s service that combines conversation, writing and tools for various activities. The offering includes web search, images and document work; Codex is dedicated to software development. The difference to evaluate is the continuity between question, analysis and production of a result. Not all features are included in every plan. Before comparing, it is necessary to indicate which model is active and which tools are enabled.
Learn more on the official website ↗Gemini — The link to the Google ecosystem
Gemini is Google’s assistant based on multimodal models, able to process different types of content. It supports writing, documents and programming, with search and creation functions. For those working with Google services, the distinguishing criterion is how much the assistant can connect to their environment. The choice should be made by verifying the integrations actually available, the permissions granted and the differences between personal and organisational accounts.
Learn more on the official website ↗Claude — From reading materials to building works
Claude is Anthropic’s assistant for analysis, writing and work activities. Artifacts allow creation and review of works separate from the conversation, such as documents and interactive tools; Claude Code is geared to software development. The useful distinction is the way one moves from dialogue to a result to edit and share. Calling it always better at writing would require a comparative test on declared tasks and criteria.
Learn more on the official website ↗Microsoft Copilot — Work in Microsoft 365 applications
Copilot is a name covering different experiences: chat and functions in Microsoft applications do not coincide. Microsoft 365 Copilot can assist in preparing Word documents, analyses in Excel, PowerPoint presentations and activities in Outlook and Teams. The feature to compare is closeness to the tools already used in the office. Licence, configuration and authorisations determine which data and functions are actually accessible.
Learn more on the official website ↗Perplexity — Research with sources at the centre of the answer
Perplexity presents itself as an AI-powered search engine: it searches for information on the web and builds answers accompanied by source references. It can use models from different producers, so the service name does not identify a single model. The practical difference is the path from the question to the original documents. A citation facilitates verification but does not guarantee that the source truly supports every statement.
Learn more on the official website ↗Mistral Vibe, formerly Le Chat — Mistral’s assistant and control options
The service from Mistral previously known as Le Chat is presented on the official website as Vibe. The offering includes conversation, research, material processing and activities with connected tools. Personalisation and distribution modes are important in the Mistral ecosystem: ready-to-use chat and enterprise installation are however different experiences. To compare them, one needs to read the conditions of the specific solution, without automatically attributing all the possibilities of the available models to the chat.
Learn more on the official website ↗DeepSeek — The distinction between chat, API and models
DeepSeek offers a conversational interface, API access, and documentation on its models. These levels should not be confused: using the website is not the same as integrating a model into an application. The comparison must specify version, active tools, and access mode. This is a proposal to be included in the international evaluation, verifying accuracy and limitations on one’s own tasks rather than deducing universal advantages from the product’s name alone.
Learn more on the official website ↗Writing and documents: the value lies in the revision work
A summary, a press release, and an article require different criteria. To compare assistants, the same document can be provided and a text of the same length requested, with facts, quotes, and uncertain passages clearly distinguished. One evaluates adherence to the original, omissions, clarity, and the time needed to correct the draft. A convincing tone does not demonstrate greater accuracy; stylistic preference does not equate to overall superiority.
Research and news: check original documents
For up-to-date news, it is necessary to verify that web search is active and that sources have recognizable dates, authors, and context. The presence of links is useful but they must be opened: a system might associate a correct source with a conclusion that the source does not support. The practical test consists in asking multiple tools for the same reconstruction and verifying claims against primary documents.
Programming: a correct answer must also function
For code, it is not enough for a solution to seem plausible. The comparison should use the same project and observable criteria: test execution, compliance with requirements, and quality of changes. A conversational interface and an agent working on a repository have different possibilities. Equivalent tools must therefore be compared, declaring which access and permissions were granted.
The fundamental choice is between workflows
A generalist assistant can be a starting point for various activities; an environment integrated into already used apps can reduce operational steps; a source-centred service can facilitate initial exploration of a topic. These are editorial orientation criteria, not performance verdicts. To choose, prepare three recurring tasks, test the tools under the same conditions, and measure quality, corrections, and time. Also check limitations, costs, and data processing conditions of the specific offer.
Discover the ten leading AI companies ↗Sources and documents
Document date or reference period: Official documentation consulted on 23 October 2026.
- ChatGPT — official documentation ↗
- Gemini — official documentation ↗
- Claude — official documentation ↗
- Microsoft Copilot — official documentation ↗
- Perplexity — official documentation ↗
- Mistral Vibe, formerly Le Chat — official documentation ↗
- DeepSeek — official documentation ↗
- Claude — Artifacts, official guide ↗
Text prepared with AI assistance based on the indicated sources. Interpretive evaluations are distinct from data and statements from sources.
