ChatGPT vs DeepSeek vs Gemini vs Grok vs Claude vs Perplexity | Who Is The Winner? | Simplilearn

[00:01] [music]

[00:05] >> In 2026, AI is no longer something

[00:07] people are just testing for fun. It has

[00:10] become a part of our daily work,

[00:11] learning, research, content creation,

[00:13] and even decision-making. Microsoft

[00:16] reported that in January 2026, the

[00:18] global generative AI adoption reached

[00:20] 16.3% of the world's population, which

[00:23] means roughly one in six people is

[00:25] already using AI tools to learn, work,

[00:27] or solve problems. And Stanford's 2025

[00:30] AI Index reported that 78% of

[00:33] organizations said that they were using

[00:35] AI in 2024, showing how fast the shift

[00:38] is happening. And now the real confusion

[00:40] starts because today it's not just about

[00:42] using AI, it's about choosing the right

[00:45] AI tool. Some tools are better for

[00:46] writing, some tools are better for

[00:48] research, and some tools are better for

[00:50] live information, file reading,

[00:51] long-form explanations, and

[00:53] productivity. And with names like

[00:55] ChatGPT, Deep Seek, Gemini, Grok,

[00:57] Claude, and Perplexity everywhere, a lot

[01:00] of people are asking the same question,

[01:02] "Which one should I actually use?" So

[01:03] this is exactly what this topic is

[01:05] about. In this session, we are going to

[01:07] understand these six popular AI tools in

[01:09] a simple and practical way. We will not

[01:12] look at them only as trending names, we

[01:14] will look at them based on the real use

[01:16] cases. Which tool helps you write

[01:18] better, which one is better for

[01:19] research, and which one feels stronger

[01:21] for technical tasks. We will also know

[01:23] which one works well with files,

[01:25] documents, and long content. And most

[01:27] importantly, which one makes the most

[01:29] sense for the kind of work that you

[01:30] actually do. Here is what we will cover

[01:32] in today's course. First, we will

[01:34] understand why ChatGPT is often seen as

[01:36] a strong all-rounder AI tool. Then we

[01:38] will look at Deep Seek and where it

[01:40] stands out for structured thinking and

[01:41] technical support. After that, we will

[01:43] explore Gemini and see how it fits into

[01:45] the productivity and Google ecosystem.

[01:48] Then we will talk about Grok and why

[01:49] people discuss it so much for trending

[01:51] and real-time style use. Next, we will

[01:53] look at Claude and understand why it's

[01:55] often preferred for long content and

[01:57] polished responses. Then we will cover

[01:59] Perplexity and why it's useful for

[02:00] research and source-based answers. And

[02:03] finally, we will compare them all

[02:04] together and understand which tool is

[02:06] best for each type of user. Before we

[02:08] move on, here is something really

[02:09] exciting. If you're someone who wants to

[02:11] build real job-relevant skills in

[02:13] generative AI, machine learning, and

[02:15] intelligent automation, this program can

[02:17] be genuinely helpful. It is designed to

[02:19] take you from the fundamentals to

[02:21] practical applications, so you just

[02:22] don't learn the concepts, you also work

[02:24] on hands-on projects, guided exercises,

[02:27] and industry tools that help you build

[02:28] confidence. You will also get to learn

[02:30] from industry and gain exposure to

[02:32] advanced topics like GenAI, agentic AI,

[02:35] deep learning, NLP, MLOps, and

[02:37] intelligent systems. What makes it even

[02:39] more valuable is that it focuses on

[02:41] helping you apply AI in real businesses,

[02:44] workplace scenarios, and not just

[02:45] theory. So whether you want to grow in

[02:47] your current role or move into an

[02:48] AI-driven work or build a strong

[02:51] future-ready profile, this program gives

[02:53] you the skills, practice, and

[02:54] professional credibility to move in that

[02:56] direction. So before we start off,

[02:58] here's a quick quiz question. Which AI

[03:00] tool is usually the better choice when

[03:01] you want fast research answers with

[03:03] sources? Is it A, Claude, B, Perplexity,

[03:07] C, Grok, or is it D, Deep Seek? Let us

[03:09] know your answers in the comments below.

[03:10] Hello everyone and welcome back. Right

[03:12] now, one of the biggest questions people

[03:14] have is very simple. There are so many

[03:16] AI tools everywhere, but which one

[03:18] actually helps the most in real life?

[03:20] Well, every few weeks a new name starts

[03:22] trending. One tool is called the best

[03:24] for writing, another is called the best

[03:26] for research, another is said to be

[03:28] fast, and another is said to be smart.

[03:30] And because of that, a lot of people

[03:31] feel confused. They don't know which

[03:33] tool is actually useful for their work,

[03:35] their studies, or their daily tasks.

[03:37] This is exactly why comparison matters

[03:39] most right now. This is not just about

[03:41] famous names, it's about practical

[03:43] value. Which one helps you write better,

[03:45] search faster, solve problems clearly,

[03:47] and understand files properly, save your

[03:49] time in running daily routines. So that

[03:51] is what makes this topic so relevant.

[03:53] Whether you're a student, a creator, a

[03:55] working professional, a business owner,

[03:57] or someone who simply wants a better

[03:58] assistant for everyday use, this

[04:00] comparison can help you understand what

[04:02] each tool really brings to the table. So

[04:04] instead of getting lost in hype, we are

[04:06] going to keep this simple, practical,

[04:07] and easy to understand. We will look at

[04:09] what each tool does, where each one

[04:11] feels limited, and where each one makes

[04:13] more sense depending on what kind of

[04:15] work you do. So let's now get familiar

[04:17] with the six tools in a simple and easy

[04:19] way. First, we have ChatGPT. So this is

[04:22] the tool that many people already know

[04:23] and use it for writing, brainstorming,

[04:25] learning, planning, and general

[04:26] day-to-day help. Next, we have Gemini.

[04:29] Gemini is closely connected to Google's

[04:31] world, so it becomes especially useful

[04:33] for people who work a lot with Docs,

[04:35] Gmail, Drive, Sheets, and other Google

[04:37] products. Then we have Claude. Claude is

[04:40] often known for giving calm,

[04:41] well-structured, and detailed responses,

[04:43] especially when the task involves long

[04:45] reading or careful writing. After that

[04:47] comes Perplexity. Perplexity is commonly

[04:50] used more in smart research helper

[04:51] because it helps focus strongly on

[04:53] finding answers with sources and current

[04:55] information. Deep Seek has become

[04:57] popular because many people see it as

[04:59] strong for structured problem-solving

[05:01] and technical tasks. It's also being

[05:03] talked about for a lot of value and

[05:05] performance. And finally, we have Grok.

[05:07] Grok often comes into the conversation

[05:09] when people want faster access to

[05:11] trending topics, real-time updates, and

[05:13] a more live internet feel. So even at a

[05:15] quick glance, these tools are not all

[05:17] trying to win in the same way. Some are

[05:19] stronger for writing, some feel better

[05:21] for research, and some work better for

[05:22] long documents. Some also feel useful

[05:25] for technical tasks. So that is why

[05:26] comparing them properly matters. So now

[05:29] that we know who the six players are,

[05:30] let us move on and understand how this

[05:32] comparison will be done fairly. So

[05:34] before comparing anything, there has to

[05:36] be a fair method, otherwise the whole

[05:37] comparison becomes opinion instead of

[05:39] something useful. So this comparison

[05:41] will be based on the things people

[05:43] actually care about in real life. First

[05:45] is writing and everyday work. Can the

[05:47] tool really help with emails, captions,

[05:49] scripts, notes, summaries, and daily

[05:51] tasks in a way that feels natural and

[05:53] usable? Second, we have research and

[05:55] current information. Can this help find

[05:57] updated answers, compare things clearly,

[05:59] and make research easier? Third is

[06:01] reasoning and problem-solving. Can it

[06:02] handle tasks that need step-by-step

[06:04] thinking instead of just giving a quick

[06:06] reply? Fourth is coding and technical

[06:08] help. Even for beginners, can it help

[06:10] explain things clearly, fix errors, or

[06:12] make technical tasks feel less

[06:13] confusing? Fifth, we have understanding

[06:15] documents, images, and longer content.

[06:18] Can it handle PDFs, screenshots,

[06:19] reports, charts, and long inputs

[06:21] properly? And then finally, we have

[06:23] speed, usability, and practical fit.

[06:26] Because even if a tool is powerful, it

[06:27] also need to feel easy and useful in the

[06:29] real world. So this method matters

[06:31] because the best writing tool may not be

[06:33] the best research tool. The best tool

[06:35] for long documents may not be the best

[06:37] one for quick answers. And the best tool

[06:39] for daily use may not be the strongest

[06:41] one for technical work. So instead of

[06:42] forcing one answer into another, it

[06:45] makes more sense to look at each

[06:46] category one by one. So now that this

[06:48] method is clear, let's move on to the

[06:49] first category that most people care

[06:51] about, and which is writing and everyday

[06:53] work. So this is where most people

[06:55] begin. They open one of the tools and

[06:57] ask it to write something. It could be

[06:59] an email or social media caption or a

[07:01] blog outline. It could also be a

[07:03] LinkedIn post, a script, meeting notes,

[07:04] resume point, or even a simple

[07:06] explanation. So the first thing that

[07:08] really matters is this, how natural and

[07:10] useful does the response feel? A good

[07:12] tool in this category should not give a

[07:14] long answer, it should give a clear

[07:16] answer. It should understand tone, keep

[07:18] the responses organized, and make the

[07:19] output feel ready to use. In this area,

[07:21] ChatGPT feels like a strong all-round

[07:24] option because it's flexible across

[07:25] different styles and tasks. Claude often

[07:28] stands out when writing needs to feel

[07:30] polished, calm, thoughtful, and a little

[07:32] more refined. Gemini can feel especially

[07:34] useful when the work connects with daily

[07:36] office tasks and Google ecosystem.

[07:38] Perplexity is less about stylish writing

[07:40] and more about helping gather

[07:42] information quickly, which can still be

[07:44] useful while building written content.

[07:46] Grok may feel fast and current,

[07:47] especially for prompts related to trends

[07:49] and ongoing conversations. Deep Seek can

[07:52] do well with the writing. Deep Seek can

[07:54] do well when the writing is more

[07:55] structured and logic-focused. So the key

[07:57] difference here is not who writes the

[07:59] longest answer. The real question is

[08:01] which tool gives the most usable answer

[08:03] for the kind of work that people

[08:04] actually do everyday. So now that the

[08:06] writing and everyday use is clear, let's

[08:08] move on to a category that matters even

[08:10] more when the people want facts,

[08:11] updates, and quick learning, research,

[08:13] and current information. So this is

[08:15] where the comparison becomes even more

[08:17] interesting because today people are not

[08:19] only using the tools to write, they are

[08:21] using them to search, compare, learn,

[08:23] understand trends, and check facts to

[08:25] get quick summaries. And this is done

[08:27] without opening too many tabs. And this

[08:30] is where the tools start feeling very

[08:31] different from one another. Perplexity

[08:33] is often the first name people mention

[08:35] in research conversations because it's

[08:37] focused on giving answers with sources

[08:39] and making information gathering very

[08:41] fast and direct. Grok also becomes

[08:43] relevant here because it's often linked

[08:45] with trending topics, ongoing

[08:46] discussions, and faster access to what

[08:48] is actually happening right now. Then we

[08:50] have Gemini. Gemini feels useful for

[08:52] people who are already working with

[08:54] Google tools and want research help in

[08:56] the same environment. ChatGPT has also

[08:58] become a part of this conversation

[09:00] because many people now use it not only

[09:01] for writing, but also for exploring

[09:03] topics, understanding concepts, and

[09:05] organizing information clearly. Claude

[09:07] can be helpful when it comes to research

[09:09] and it needs to be turned into a more

[09:10] thoughtful and deeper explanation.

[09:13] Deep Seek also enters the picture when

[09:14] users want structured responses and

[09:16] cleaner breakdowns. So in this section,

[09:18] the difference becomes very clear. Some

[09:20] tools feel more like answer generators

[09:22] and some feel more like research

[09:23] assistants. And some feel stronger at

[09:26] gathering, while others feel stronger at

[09:27] explaining. So that is why this category

[09:29] matters so much in daily life. So now

[09:32] that the research and the current

[09:33] information are clear, let's move on to

[09:34] the next category, which is on reasoning

[09:36] and problem-solving, where the real

[09:38] depth of a tool starts to show. So this

[09:40] is the point where the comparison starts

[09:41] to get really serious because a tool can

[09:43] sound impressive in the first few

[09:45] seconds and still not be really helpful.

[09:47] So reasoning is not about giving the

[09:48] fastest reply, it's about understanding

[09:50] the situation properly, breaking it down

[09:52] step by step, and then giving an answer

[09:54] which actually makes sense. So whether

[09:56] it's solving a tricky question,

[09:58] comparing options, planning something

[10:00] clearly, or handling a prompt with

[10:01] multiple layers, this is where the real

[10:03] quality of a tool starts to show. A

[10:05] strong tool in this area doesn't rush.

[10:08] It stays organized, keeps the response

[10:10] clear, and helps move from confusion to

[10:12] clarity. So, instead of throwing out

[10:14] some random points, it builds the answer

[10:16] in a way that feels dependable. So, that

[10:18] matters because in real life, people are

[10:19] not only using these tools for fun

[10:21] questions, they are using them to make

[10:23] decisions, understand concepts, solve

[10:25] work problems, and save time on tasks

[10:27] that really matter. So, the real

[10:28] difference here is simple. One tool may

[10:30] give a fast answer, but another gives an

[10:32] answer which feels more reliable, more

[10:34] structured, and easier to trust. And

[10:36] when the task becomes more complex, that

[10:38] difference becomes much more important.

[10:40] So, this is exactly why reasoning and

[10:42] problem-solving is one of the most

[10:43] strongest ways to judge which tool is

[10:45] genuinely useful and which one just

[10:47] sounds good at the first glance. So, now

[10:49] that this part is clear, let's move on

[10:51] to another important category that a lot

[10:53] of viewers are curious about today,

[10:55] coding and technical task support. So,

[10:57] even people who are not fully full-time

[10:59] developers are now using these tools for

[11:01] technical help. So, they are using them

[11:03] to understand code, fix errors, write

[11:05] formulas, help explain commands, build

[11:07] small projects, and simplify tasks that

[11:09] could otherwise feel really difficult.

[11:11] So, this part is not only for coders,

[11:12] it's also for learners, beginners,

[11:14] students, and working professionals who

[11:16] want support with technical work. So,

[11:17] the most important tool here is not just

[11:19] the one that writes code quickly. The

[11:21] better tool is the one that explains

[11:23] clearly, reduces confusion, and makes

[11:25] the task easier to understand. ChatGPT

[11:27] is widely used in this area because many

[11:29] people find it flexible for explaining,

[11:31] generating, correcting, and breaking

[11:33] technical things into simpler steps.

[11:35] Claude also enters this conversation

[11:37] because it often handles longer context

[11:39] well and can stay clear while explaining

[11:41] bigger tasks. Deep Seek gets a lot of

[11:44] attention because many users talk about

[11:46] it for structured technical work and

[11:48] value-focused use. Gemini can be useful

[11:51] when the task connects with wider

[11:52] Google-based work. Perplexity can still

[11:55] help when the goal is to search for

[11:56] technical information and compare

[11:58] reliable answers. Grok can feel useful

[12:00] when the task connects to current

[12:02] discussions or quicker online

[12:03] exploration. So, the key point here is

[12:05] simple. A strong technical assistant

[12:07] should not make things more complicated.

[12:09] It should make them clearer. It should

[12:11] help people feel less stuck and more

[12:13] confident. So, now that coding and

[12:14] technical help are clear, let's move on

[12:16] to a category that has become very

[12:18] important in modern use, understanding

[12:20] documents, images, and long content. So,

[12:22] this category matters because people no

[12:24] longer use these tools only for short

[12:26] questions. Today, people are uploading

[12:28] files screenshots reports resumes

[12:30] charts, slides, and PDFs, and expecting

[12:33] the tool to understand them properly.

[12:34] That changes everything. A tool that can

[12:37] handle uploaded content well becomes

[12:39] much more useful in everyday work, and

[12:41] it's no longer just a chatting tool. It

[12:43] starts becoming a work assistant. In

[12:45] this area, Gemini becomes especially

[12:47] relevant for people who are already

[12:48] working with files inside Google tools.

[12:50] Claude is often talked about for how

[12:52] well it handles long reading and

[12:54] detailed content. ChatGPT is commonly

[12:56] used for document-based talks, file

[12:58] summaries, and learning support. Grok

[13:00] enters the discussion when people want a

[13:02] more current and connected experience

[13:04] across different kinds of inputs. Deep

[13:06] Seek can also be useful when the task

[13:08] depends on structured handling and

[13:10] careful breakdowns. Perplexity can be

[13:12] helpful when the uploaded content needs

[13:14] to be connected back to source research

[13:16] or broader information. So, the real

[13:18] question in this category is not just

[13:20] whether the tool can read the file. The

[13:21] real question is whether it can

[13:23] understand the context, return something

[13:24] organized, and save real time. So, that

[13:27] is why this category matters so much in

[13:29] office work, study routines, content

[13:31] creation, or day-to-day productivity.

[13:33] So, now that the documents, images, and

[13:34] the long content is covered, let's move

[13:36] on to the final section where everything

[13:38] comes together, practical fit, ease of

[13:40] use, and final verdict. So, after

[13:42] looking at all these categories, the

[13:44] biggest takeaway becomes very clear.

[13:46] There is no single perfect tool for

[13:47] every person, and that is actually the

[13:49] smartest conclusion because a better

[13:51] question is not which tool is best

[13:53] overall. The better question is which

[13:54] tool is best for all kinds of work that

[13:56] someone actually does. If someone wants

[13:58] a strong all-round tool for daily

[14:00] writing, planning, learning, and general

[14:02] tasks, one option may feel like the

[14:04] right fit. So, if someone wants a

[14:06] stronger research and faster

[14:07] source-based answer, another may stand

[14:09] out more clearly. And if someone wants a

[14:11] strong long-form reading and detailed

[14:13] understanding, another may feel more

[14:15] dependable. So, if someone lives inside

[14:17] the Google ecosystem, one tool may

[14:18] naturally feel useful. And if someone

[14:20] wants a quick trend-based exploration,

[14:22] another may seem very appealing.

[14:24] And if someone is looking for strong

[14:25] structure with the help of better value,

[14:27] so the smartest way to end this

[14:29] comparison is not by forcing one winner

[14:30] for everyone. The smartest ending is to

[14:32] match the tool to the use case. And that

[14:35] feels more honest, useful, and more

[14:37] practical. So, the final message is

[14:38] simple. Do not choose based on the hype,

[14:40] trends, or the loudest option online.

[14:42] Choose based on what is actually helping

[14:44] you save time, improve work, and make

[14:46] daily tasks easier. So, now that the

[14:48] overall picture is fully clear, the live

[14:50] demo section will make it even more

[14:51] sense because the real outputs can now

[14:54] be judged against the strengths and the

[14:55] use cases we have just understood. So,

[14:57] let's move on to that.

[15:00] Hello, everyone, and welcome back. I

[15:02] have all the six tools open here, which

[15:04] is ChatGPT, Grok, Perplexity, Deep Seek,

[15:06] Claude, and Gemini. And instead of

[15:08] talking about all of them in a general

[15:09] way, I'm going to open them all one by

[15:11] one and use them in a way that most

[15:12] people actually do. I want to see how it

[15:14] feels when the page opens, how quickly

[15:16] they get to the point, and how clearly

[15:18] they answer, along with which which one

[15:20] feels most useful for the kind of work

[15:22] that people are actually doing on an

[15:23] everyday basis. So, I'm starting with

[15:25] ChatGPT here first because it works well

[15:27] with the baseline for this whole

[15:28] comparison. And then I will move on to

[15:30] the tools that feel stronger with the

[15:31] current information, structured

[15:33] thinking, file work, and polished

[15:34] output. So, as you can see, I've opened

[15:36] ChatGPT here first because it's one of

[15:38] the most easiest place to start when the

[15:40] goal is everyday writing, planning, and

[15:42] general productivity. And OpenAI's

[15:44] current ChatGPT help pages show that the

[15:46] uploaded files can be reused later

[15:48] through the library on web. So, the

[15:50] first thing I'm typing here is this,

[15:52] write a

[15:54] short for

[15:56] a beginner who just completed completed

[16:01] a

[16:02] course. So, now while this loads, what

[16:04] I'm looking for here is balance. A

[16:06] strong ChatGPT answer will usually feel

[16:08] polished, clear, and ready to use

[16:10] without sounding too stiff. So, I want

[16:12] it to stay inside the word limit,

[16:14] keeping the tone warm, and avoid

[16:15] sounding like a template. And if the

[16:17] answer feels like something that a real

[16:19] person could post one after a small

[16:21] edit, that is a very good start. So, now

[16:23] that the writing side is clear, I'm

[16:25] staying inside the same chat and pushing

[16:27] it one step further with a very natural

[16:29] follow-up. Make it sound slightly

[16:33] more more personal.

[16:37] So, the second line matters because it

[16:39] shows whether the tool can actually

[16:40] listen to the style correction instead

[16:42] of starting from scratch. So, if the

[16:43] next version becomes more natural

[16:45] without losing the original meaning,

[16:46] that tells us that the flow is smooth

[16:48] and usable. So, now that the basic flow

[16:50] is clear, I'm going to come back to the

[16:52] ChatGPT a little later for file work

[16:54] because that is also one of the most

[16:55] stronger areas. But before that, I want

[16:58] to move to a tool that is much more

[16:59] associated with what is happening right

[17:01] now. So, as you can see, I've opened

[17:03] Grok over here. So, I'm opening Grok

[17:05] next because xAI's current product

[17:07] materials lean heavily into real-time

[17:09] research, voice, and vision. So, it

[17:11] makes sense to test it on something

[17:12] that's fresh and fast-moving rather than

[17:15] on a quiet writing task alone. So, here

[17:17] is a prompt that I'm typing into Grok.

[17:19] Why are the AI agents trending? So, now

[17:26] while this loads, what I'm expecting

[17:27] from Grok is freshness. I want the

[17:29] answer to feel current, faster, and

[17:31] connected to live conversations. So, if

[17:33] it brings in recent developments keenly

[17:36] and makes the explanation feels more

[17:37] simple instead of heavy, that is where

[17:39] Grok starts to feel looking useful. So,

[17:41] if the tone feels a little more direct

[17:43] and internet-aware, that also fits for

[17:45] this kind of position. So, here's what

[17:47] Grok is aiming for. Now, I'll be adding

[17:49] an extra line to the same chat. Now,

[17:53] give me a more beginner-friendly.

[17:57] So, this follow-up matters because a lot

[17:59] of tools can answer quickly, but not all

[18:01] of them can soften the tone properly for

[18:03] a beginner. So, if Grok keeps the answer

[18:05] current while making it easier to

[18:07] understand, that is a good sign. So, now

[18:09] that we've checked the real-time angle,

[18:11] I'm moving from the tool that people

[18:12] often open when they want sources and a

[18:14] research-style answer right away. So, as

[18:17] you can see here, I've opened Perplexity

[18:19] next because its help center explicitly

[18:21] supports file attachment and follow-up

[18:23] context inside the same thread, and the

[18:25] product is widely centered around

[18:26] search-style answer. So, I'm typing this

[18:28] into Perplexity. Why are the agents

[18:33] trending in 2026? So, now as this opens

[18:37] up, what I'm expecting here is not just

[18:40] a neat answer. I'm expecting a more

[18:41] research-like result. I want to see

[18:44] whether the answer feels grounded,

[18:45] whether it points to sources naturally,

[18:47] or whether it sounds like something I

[18:48] could use to understand a topic quickly

[18:50] without hunting down it. I want to see

[18:52] whether the answers feel grounded,

[18:54] whether it points to sources naturally,

[18:56] and whether it feels like something I

[18:58] could use to understand a topic quickly

[18:59] without hunting around on. So, as you

[19:01] can see, this is the result we have

[19:03] obtained, and it's more research-like.

[19:05] So, now I'm following that with this,

[19:07] compare ChatGPT, Grok, and Perplexity

[19:09] for someone who mainly wants fast

[19:11] research and trustworthy references. So,

[19:13] keep it a short table. This is a very

[19:15] good second step because it shows

[19:17] whether the tool can stay organized

[19:18] after the first answer and turn that

[19:20] information into something more

[19:22] unstable. So, if the table is clean,

[19:24] practical, and easy to scan, Perplexity

[19:26] immediately starts with feeling valuable

[19:28] for research-heavy work. So, now that

[19:30] the search and sources side is clear,

[19:31] I'm moving to the tool I want to use for

[19:33] structured thinking and technical

[19:35] clarity. So, as you can see here, I've

[19:37] used Deep Seek for the same. I've opened

[19:39] Deep Seek here because its current chat

[19:41] page describes it as an assistant for

[19:43] coding, content creation, file reading,

[19:45] and long context work. And Deep Seek's

[19:47] own docs also note web search on

[19:49] chat.deepseek.com.

[19:51] So, the first thing I'm typing here is

[19:53] this. I have 2 hours every weekday. So,

[19:57] now what I'm looking for here in Deep

[19:59] Seek is structure. I want the answer to

[20:01] feel well organized, sensible, and

[20:02] step-by-step. A strong result should not

[20:04] just throw subjects into a calendar. It

[20:06] should divide time properly, keep the

[20:08] schedule realistic, and explain the

[20:10] logic in a way that feels useful. So,

[20:12] now that the planning side is visible,

[20:14] I'm staying in Deep Seek and asking

[20:15] something very small but practical.

[20:17] Explain this Python code for for

[20:22] beginners. So, now I'll go and add the

[20:24] code. So, now this is where clarity

[20:26] matters. More than flashy language, the

[20:29] best answer here is the one that calmly

[20:31] explains that numbers is a list and max

[20:33] numbers finds the biggest number and

[20:35] that the output is nine because nine is

[20:37] the largest value in the list. So, if

[20:39] Deep Seek handles that in a very clean

[20:40] and non-confusing way, it starts looking

[20:43] very strong for learners and technical

[20:44] explanation. So, now that the reasoning

[20:46] and coding side is clear, I'm moving

[20:48] into the part that feels much more

[20:50] closer to real office work, which is

[20:51] uploading a file and seeing what the

[20:53] tool actually does with it. I'm opening

[20:55] Claude for the file-heavy part because

[20:57] Claude support pages show artifacts for

[20:59] substantial stand-alone content and

[21:01] documents that Claude can create and

[21:03] edit files directly. That makes it a

[21:05] very natural place to test long content

[21:07] understanding and turning that content

[21:09] into something very usable. So, I'm

[21:11] uploading the same file here that I will

[21:13] also use in the next few tools once it's

[21:15] attached. So, I'm typing the following.

[21:17] Read this file and do three things. So,

[21:24] when I've uploaded the file, I'm

[21:25] expecting that Claude is calm, polished,

[21:28] and understanding. I want a one-line

[21:30] summary to be accurate and the three key

[21:32] points to feel more important and the

[21:34] week section to be specific, along with

[21:36] which the simpler rewrite to still

[21:38] preserve the meaning. And if Claude

[21:40] handles the file carefully and the

[21:42] response feels thoughtful rather than

[21:43] rushed, that is exactly where it starts

[21:46] standing out. So, now I'm taking this

[21:47] file one step further. Turn this file

[21:50] into a five-slide presentation.

[21:55] So, this is a strong check because

[21:57] Claude's artifact-style workflow is

[21:58] supposed to be good at producing larger

[22:00] reusable outputs. So, if the outline

[22:03] feels clean, presentation ready, and

[22:05] easy to speak from, that tells me that

[22:07] the file has not just been read, it has

[22:09] been transformed properly. So, now that

[22:11] the polished long content side is clear,

[22:13] I'm moving on to the tool that should

[22:14] feel especially comfortable when the

[22:16] work starts looking like documents,

[22:17] study material, and workspace-style

[22:19] productive. For the same reason we have

[22:21] Gemini. So, I've opened Gemini here

[22:23] because Google's help pages show that

[22:25] Gemini app support file uploads that can

[22:27] handle up to 10 files in one prompt and

[22:29] can create things like charts and

[22:30] uploaded data. So, the Gemini Help

[22:33] Center also currently points people to

[22:35] features like Canvas and Deep Research,

[22:37] which makes Gemini a good fit for

[22:39] structured productivity-style tasks. So,

[22:41] I am uploading the same file here and

[22:43] typing, read this file and give me a

[22:49] simple explanation.

[22:52] So, now what I'm expecting from Gemini

[22:54] is a clean, study-friendly response. I

[22:56] want it to feel organized, clear, and

[22:58] practical. So, if the explanation is

[23:00] simple, the bullet points are neat, and

[23:02] the revision questions are actually

[23:04] helping someone remember the content,

[23:06] Gemini starts looking very useful for

[23:07] learning and everyday office use. So,

[23:09] now I'm adding one more follow-up here.

[23:11] So, like I said, here are the bullet

[23:14] points which were needed. So, coming

[23:16] back to the prompt, now turn the same

[23:20] content into So, the second pass here

[23:23] matters because it checks whether the

[23:25] tool can shift the format without losing

[23:27] the original meaning. So, if it moves

[23:29] from study mode to an email mobile mode

[23:31] smoothly, that tells me that it's

[23:32] flexible in every practical way. So,

[23:34] [snorts] now that Gemini's handled the

[23:36] learning and productivity angle, I'm

[23:38] moving back to the file workflow in a

[23:39] more research-focused environment, which

[23:41] is Perplexity. So, I have returned here

[23:43] to Perplexity and attaching the same

[23:45] file here because Perplexity explicitly

[23:47] supports file uploads from the attach

[23:49] button and keeps the context for

[23:51] follow-up questions in the same thread.

[23:53] So, I'll go ahead and type, read the

[23:56] following file. So, what I'm expecting

[23:59] here is a sharper research-style read on

[24:02] the file. So, I want to see whether

[24:03] Perplexity treats the file a little more

[24:05] like evidence, notices that there's

[24:07] something feeling unsupported, and gives

[24:09] a more verification-focused answer

[24:11] instead of just rewriting the text

[24:12] nicely. Then I will be adding the

[24:14] following. Give me three follow-up

[24:18] questions.

[24:20] So, as you can see, I have not really

[24:21] attached a file yet. So, this is where

[24:24] Perplexity can feel especially useful

[24:26] because a strong answer here should not

[24:27] just summarize. It would help push

[24:29] thinking forward. So, now I'm going back

[24:31] to ChatGPT for the same uploaded file.

[24:33] Yeah.

[24:34] So, for your information, ChatGPT's

[24:36] current web experience includes file

[24:38] reuse through the library, which makes

[24:40] it more useful for the same material and

[24:42] it needs to be worked on again and

[24:43] again. So, I'll be typing the following.

[24:46] Read the

[24:48] following file and turn it into So, what

[24:52] I'm looking for here is flow. I want the

[24:55] script to sound usable out loud, not

[24:57] like a report pasted into a chat. So, if

[24:59] ChatGPT keeps the meaning but makes the

[25:01] language smoother and easier to present,

[25:03] that becomes very helpful for content

[25:05] creation and presentation work. So, now

[25:07] I will be following it up with this.

[25:09] Make the same script shorter and more

[25:14] energetic.

[25:16] So, this is an important final check

[25:17] because it shows whether ChatGPT can

[25:19] reshape the same content for a different

[25:21] speaking style without losing its core

[25:23] message. So, now let's move on to the

[25:25] website feel while everything is open.

[25:27] So, at this point the differences start

[25:28] becoming very visible even without

[25:30] saying much. ChatGPT feels like a

[25:32] flexible all-rounder for writing and

[25:34] reusable content. Grok feels more useful

[25:37] when the topic is fresh and moving fast.

[25:39] Perplexity feels the strongest when the

[25:41] sources are research-style and clarity

[25:43] matters. Deep Seek feels very solid when

[25:45] the structure thinking and technical

[25:46] explanations are needed. Claude feels

[25:49] strong when the content is long and

[25:50] needs to be turned into something

[25:51] polished. And Gemini feels comfortable

[25:54] when the work starts looking more like

[25:55] learning material, office material, or

[25:57] structured productivity.

[25:59] All of that lines up with what the

[26:00] companies are currently surfacing in

[26:01] their product materials and their help

[26:03] pages. So, after opening each one

[26:05] properly, typing real prompts, pushing

[26:07] them through writing, current

[26:08] information, structure planning, and

[26:10] small code explanation, file

[26:12] understanding, as well as follow-up

[26:13] work, the answer becomes very clear. The

[26:15] better choice is not always the most

[26:17] talked upon one. The better choice is

[26:19] the one that feels most useful for the

[26:21] kind of work that someone actually does.

[26:23] So, that is the foundation of this

[26:24] comparison. So, by the end of this

[26:26] session, you may have had a clearer idea

[26:28] of what AI tool actually fits your work,

[26:30] your learning, and your daily needs.

[26:32] Follow Simply Learn.