Claude vs. GPT: Which is best for note-taking?
Summary
TLDRThe video script explores the use of Claude 3.5 Sonnet and GPT 4.0 in Reflect's AI assistant, offering a preference for Claude due to its superior performance. The presenter compares the two models across various tasks, including summarizing, writing emails, crafting counterarguments, simplifying complex information, and rephrasing text. Examples demonstrate Claude's advantage in providing more detailed and logically structured responses, though GPT shows efficiency in shorter, well-formatted text. The script concludes with the intention to update the comparison as new AI models emerge.
Takeaways
- 🔧 The video discusses the choice between using Claude 3.5 Sonnet and GPT 4.0 within the Reflect app for AI-assisted note-taking.
- 🔄 Reflect allows users to toggle between different AI providers, with the default being Anthropic's Claude 3.5 Sonnet, but also offering OpenAI's GPT 4.0.
- 📊 A performance comparison is presented, suggesting that Claude 3.5 Sonnet generally performs better than GPT 4.0 in various tasks.
- 📝 The script provides examples of AI-generated content, including summarizing text, writing emails, creating counterarguments, simplifying writing, and rephrasing text.
- 🏆 Claude 3.5 Sonnet is favored for its ability to provide more detailed summaries and better-structured responses, especially in list format.
- 📧 When generating emails, Claude's output is described as more professional and potentially more efficient for corporate communication.
- 💼 GPT 4.0's responses are noted to be shorter, which can be an advantage in some contexts, but may lack the depth provided by Claude.
- 🤖 The video emphasizes the importance of formatting and the clarity of logical arguments, where Claude seems to excel.
- 📚 Simplifying complex information into an easy-to-understand list is highlighted as a strong point for Claude's AI.
- 📝 Rephrasing capabilities are tested, with Claude maintaining a high level of language quality, despite the simplicity of the task.
- 🔑 The video concludes with a recommendation to keep the default AI setting in Reflect, and a plan to update comparisons as new models are released.
Q & A
What is the main topic discussed in the video script?
-The main topic discussed in the video script is the comparison between using Claude 3.5 Sonnet and GPT 4.0 within the Reflect note-taking application, and how to choose between the two AI providers based on their performance in various tasks.
How does Reflect allow users to toggle between different AI providers?
-Reflect allows users to toggle between different AI providers by going to their preferences and selecting the AI provider they want to use from the dropdown menu, which includes options like Anthropic (Claude 3.5 Sonnet) and OpenAI (GPT 4.0).
What is the default AI provider in Reflect as mentioned in the script?
-The default AI provider in Reflect, as mentioned in the script, is Anthropic, which uses Claude 3.5 Sonnet.
What is the general recommendation given in the script for choosing between Claude 3.5 Sonnet and GPT 4.0?
-The general recommendation given in the script is to use Claude 3.5 Sonnet if one has to choose only one, as it is considered better overall based on the performance comparison.
What are some of the tasks compared in the script to evaluate the performance of Claude 3.5 Sonnet and GPT 4.0?
-Some of the tasks compared in the script include summarizing text, writing an email, generating a counter-argument, simplifying and condensing writing, and rephrasing writing.
What is the observation made about the summaries generated by Claude 3.5 Sonnet and GPT 4.0?
-The observation made about the summaries is that GPT 4.0 produces shorter summaries, but Claude 3.5 Sonnet includes more information, which might be preferable depending on the context.
How does the script describe the email writing capability of Claude 3.5 Sonnet and GPT 4.0?
-The script describes Claude 3.5 Sonnet's email writing as more formal and including 'fluff text', while GPT 4.0's version is shorter and more to the point, with better formatting in some cases.
What is the script's conclusion about the counter-argument task performed by the AI models?
-The script concludes that Claude 3.5 Sonnet performed better in the counter-argument task, providing a list of logical points that were more compelling and concrete compared to GPT 4.0.
How does the script evaluate the simplification and condensation of writing by the AI models?
-The script evaluates the simplification and condensation by having the AI models distill a paragraph about CNC manufacturing into a simpler, more understandable format, with Claude 3.5 Sonnet providing a step-by-step list that was considered better.
What is the script's final verdict on the rephrasing task performed by Claude 3.5 Sonnet and GPT 4.0?
-The script's final verdict on the rephrasing task is that while both AI models did a decent job, Claude 3.5 Sonnet's version was slightly better, although the difference was not very significant.
What does the script suggest for users who want to keep track of updates to the AI models used in Reflect?
-The script suggests that users keep their settings on default and subscribe to the channel for updates, as the script author plans to publish a sheet with examples and update it as new AI models are introduced or when existing models are updated.
Outlines
🤖 AI Provider Comparison in Reflect
The script discusses the choice between using Claude 3.5 Sonnet and GPT 4.0 within the Reflect app. The narrator explains how users can toggle between these AI providers in the app's preferences. A performance comparison is presented, with the general consensus that Claude 3.5 Sonnet performs better overall. Examples are given to illustrate the differences in summarizing text, writing emails, and generating counterarguments, with Claude often providing more detailed responses. The script also mentions the use of the chat feature in advanced search, which will use the selected AI model, and the narrator's intention to compare this feature in a future video.
📝 Evaluating AI Performance in Text Simplification and Rewriting
The second paragraph delves into the AI's ability to simplify and condense complex information, as well as rephrase writing. The narrator tests both Claude and GPT on summarizing a paragraph about CNC manufacturing, with Claude providing a step-by-step list that simplifies the process effectively. GPT, while also simplifying the text, does not reformat it as effectively. The narrator also evaluates the AI's performance on rephrasing a piece of writing, finding Claude's output to be slightly better than GPT's, although both are similar. The paragraph concludes with the narrator's plan to publish a sheet with ongoing examples to compare the AI models and to update it as new models are released.
Mindmap
Keywords
💡Claude 3.5 Sonnet
💡GPT 4.0
💡Reflect
💡AI Provider
💡Summarizing Text
💡Email Generation
💡Logic and Counterargument
💡Simplify and Condense Writing
💡Rephrase Writing
💡System Prompts
💡Chatting with Notes
Highlights
Reflect allows toggling between Claude 3.5 Sonnet and GPT 4.0 within notes.
Reflect updates the LLMs used and allows manual selection of the AI provider.
Claude 3.5 Sonnet is generally recommended over GPT 4.0 based on performance comparison.
AI can be used to summarize text with varying levels of detail and formatting.
GPT 4.0 provides shorter summaries but may lack some details compared to Claude.
AI can generate emails with different styles and tones, speeding up corporate communication.
Claude tends to use more formal language in email generation compared to GPT.
GPT 4.0 has better formatting in email generation, but Claude has better writing quality.
AI can create counterarguments with logical points, with Claude providing more compelling arguments.
Claude formats counterarguments as a list, making them easier to understand.
AI simplification of complex information, like CNC manufacturing, is more effective with Claude.
GPT struggles to reformat simplified information, while Claude presents it as a step-by-step list.
Claude outperforms GPT in rephrasing writing, maintaining the original meaning with better word choices.
The presenter plans to publish a comprehensive comparison sheet and update it with new AI models.
A future video will cover the difference in results when chatting with notes using different AI models.
The default AI setting is recommended for most users, with the option to switch based on personal preference.
Transcripts
I've been getting quite a few questions from people about whether
they should be using Claude 3.
5 Sonnet or GPT 4.
0 within their notes.
Now for some context, Reflect now lets you toggle between the two.
So if I head over to my preferences here, uh, you can see in the AI
provider, I can switch between the default, which is Anthropic, but Reflect
is always updating the LLMs we use.
So if I think if we You know, update to a better one.
It will just change that to the default, or you can manually set it to
anthropic, which right now uses cloud 3.
5 sonnet or open AI, uh, which means it will be using GPT 4.
0.
So going back here, you can actually see a bit of a performance comparison.
If you're curious on each of these elements.
So in general, uh, cloud 3.
5 sonnet is just better.
Uh, like, you know, you'll see Alex say that in discord.
So if you objectively just have to leave it on one, I
would recommend using cloud 3.
5 sonnet, but there is the option.
And I thought what I would do is go through some examples here.
And basically what I have is an original, uh, piece of text, and then I'll show
you what it looks like when I run the AI assistant using cloud and GPT.
So I've already done this for all of you.
So you don't have to watch the AI prompt go, but just as a summary, uh,
you can highlight texts, do command J or click on the magic stars here.
And then just select an AI prompt here, and it will use whatever
you put in the preferences there.
Now I should also note that the chat, so if you go to the advanced search
here and then start chatting with your notes, that will also use that model,
and I'll probably do a comparison on that one at a later point as well.
But to start off with, let's summarize some text.
I'm going to start with Claude here, so actually I should leave the original open.
So this one is summarizing text.
I believe I just did the short summary prompt here, right, a short summary.
And let's take a look at both of these and see how they did.
So initially here I'm going to give GPT a little credit because
the summary is shorter, but that doesn't necessarily mean it's better.
Um, so let me kind of read through these.
So, I mean, they're both pretty decent to be honest.
I don't think either one of these is bad.
I think the comparison here I would give is that the Cloud 3.
5 Sonnet left in a bit more information, and the GPT 1 condensed it a bit more.
Um, so for that one, I would probably still credit it with Claude.
That's still like a, you know, quite a bit of a summary on that.
Although, I do probably wish it would have condensed it a little bit more.
Uh, okay, let's try the just writing text.
So this is kind of, uh, one of the things that I think, You know, LLM struggle with
the most is where you're just asking it to generate text based off of something.
So what I've done here is I've taken an example like we are in our notes and we
need to write an email about something.
In this case telling someone that a launch is pushed I just kind
of made this up and then I gave it like a voice and tone thing.
So, uh, what I would do is then on each of these I ran it and then,
uh, Email, um, there's a system prompt called generate an email.
Uh, so Claude, dear Todd, I hope this email finds you well.
It always writes off like that.
Wanted to inform you of important update regarding yadda yadda yadda after careful
consideration So I basically just put in some fluff text, but I actually think
that's pretty good Like I don't know if I just work some corporate job and my job
was just like sending emails like this I mean, that could really speed up your work
if you just wrote things in bullet points.
And I should also say here that, you know, I'm just using the system prompts.
In this case, I would probably would have a custom prompt for writing an email.
Should actually do a video on that, uh, where it doesn't use some
of this kind of gaggy language.
Like, I hope this email finds you well.
Uh, all right, let's look at GPTs.
It's still shorter.
So this is something that's kind of interesting, uh, is that the
GPT does seem to be shorter so far.
Um, but anyway, do you Todd, same thing.
I hope this message finds you.
Well, that's a worse writing though.
Uh, I wanted to inform you that we have decided to push the launch of starter
cookie to next month instead of August, so, okay, I have to say, I think the GPT
one's just objectively better on this one.
Uh, I think the formatting is better and that's kind of what
I'm noticing on some of these.
The formatting with GPT is better, but the writing with Claude is better.
Uh, okay, so that was writing an email.
That was honestly probably one of the harder ones.
Uh, let's move on to some logic here.
Counter argument.
So, I just gave it this simple sentence that AI will fully automate
30 percent of jobs by the year 2030.
I think McKinsey is the one that just announced this, so I just
thought of it off the top of my head.
Uh, so let's see what Claude says.
While AI will likely impact many jobs, the prediction of 30 percent
full automation is likely overstated.
And then it just lists out some points here.
Um, let's move on.
So, yeah, these are just great logical points.
I kind of like also that this is effectively a list of counterarguments,
so that's kind of nice.
GPTs, on the other hand, kept it in a paragraph format.
So, while AI is advancing rapidly, it's unlikely due to several
factors, the complexity of human tasks, need for emotional
intelligence, ethical and simplicity.
Okay, so this, to me, seems like a clear win for Cloud.
Uh, you know, a lot of the information is the same, but I think it's phrased better.
It's formatted better in this one, unlike the previous ones in a list like that.
And it's just more compelling.
So this is just a lot of soft stuff.
Um, whereas this seems more like concrete, logical arguments, which is effectively
what the original prompt was asking.
So, uh, big point for Claude there.
Okay, simplify and condense writing.
So this is, uh, Teaser.
This is like, summarizing, except, uh, I view it as better at, like,
taking complicated information and distilling it into something that's
easier to understand, versus just that.
Just the condensing part.
So here I just used AI to generate a paragraph about CNC manufacturing.
I don't really know much about this, but I'm starting to explore it.
And so this is a scenario where, you know, I'm pretending I have stolen this from
like an article or a book or something, and I maybe don't understand it.
And so instead, I'm going to have AI just kind of simplify
it so that I can understand it.
And hopefully it will be shorter so I don't have to read that big block of text.
So let's see how it does here.
Okay, so again it hits me with the list.
I love the list thing.
And again, that's, I'm running the same prompt on all of these.
So it's doing the list and the formatting automatically.
And it's distilled it into an actual process.
So that one's really cool.
I think this might be the best one so far.
So here it starts off with like the process, and it picks that
up, and then it does step by step.
And then now it actually just defines it into a step by step list.
I really like that.
GPT on the other hand, again, it just condensed the text, which is kind of fair.
That's what the prompt said, but it just wasn't smart enough to know that it
would be better for it to reformat a bit.
Um, Starts with designing the part with the software, design and creates
the model, CAD model is then exported.
But I still, this is quite good because it still has simplified it and I
can understand this without knowing anything about CNC manufacturing.
So again, both models are good, but I would definitely favor Cloud here.
So I think we have a strong win so far from Cloud here in these examples.
Okay, this is the last one I have, rephrase writing.
So original, ah, a teaser again.
Uh, the original is, um, Oh, this is from a paragraph that I wrote actually in an
article on DIY manufacturing revolution.
So I'm just going to see how it does rephrasing my own writing.
Um, so Claude, in contrast to software, hardware development
continues to be a daunting task.
It demands substantial financial investment and
intriguing logistical planning.
Um, so that's pretty good.
I mean, you know, the prompt is just to rephrase it.
It's not supposed to rephrase it in anyone's writing.
So I guess it's kind of a little bit hard to assess this one.
But I did want to use system prompts for this video and all of
mine that are rephrasing it, like specific people are custom prompts.
Um, but you know, it did a pretty good job at rephrasing that.
So if I was writing something, let's actually first look at the GPT one.
Yeah, that definitely seems worse than me.
I mean, I don't like that Claude uses words like daunting still.
I don't think that's much better than delve, but, um,
overall I would give the Claude a point in this one.
Um, But to be honest, they're pretty similar and that's probably my fault.
Maybe I shouldn't have chosen a simple rephrasing, but you know,
I wanted to see how it does.
So, um, those are all the examples that I have.
I think what I'm going to do is publish this sheet and then I'm
going to keep adding some examples and people can kind of just get an
idea of which ones are better and I'll make it more comprehensive.
And then maybe even, uh, you know, when we update our, uh, AI model that we use,
like, I don't know, maybe we add in, um, like llama three, what, I don't know what
they're on right now from, uh, meta or.
You know, maybe Anthropic and OpenAI come out with a new model and I can just
go through and update these so people always know which one they want to choose.
Um, but in general, I would keep my setting on default.
And, uh, again, I'm going to try and do a video on, um, chatting
with your notes and the difference in kind of the results of that.
So that might be next week, but go ahead and subscribe to our
channel and then you'll see it.
Ver Más Videos Relacionados
GPT-4o VS Claude 3.5 Sonnet - Which AI is #1?
GPT 4o Vs Claude 3.5 Sonnet - Head to Head Comparison - Who wins?
Claude 3.5 Sonnet vs GPT-4o: Side-by-Side Tests
Claude 3 meglio di Chat GPT4 e Gemini! 🤯 Guida per utilizzare Claude 3 OPUS GRATIS [ita]
Claude 3.5 Deep Dive: This new AI destroys GPT
CLAUDE 3: SONNET (FREE) E' LA MIGLIORE AI PER IL COPY (ANCHE MEGLIO DI GPT-4 E OPUS)
5.0 / 5 (0 votes)