Every time a new AI model launches, it often claims to be better or even the best. Sure, each one brings unique features to the table and gets hyped in different situations, but what really matters is how well it performs in real-life use cases.
I’ve been using ChatGPT for everyday tasks that require AI assistance. I even have my best ChatGPT prompts for academic writing.
But it’s not just my friends; plenty of online comments have praised other AI models, including Elon Musk’s Grok 3, as being even better.
Even as I want the best possible results from using an AI, I wouldn’t buy into the hype without proof. That’s why I decided to do a Grok 3 vs. ChatGPT review using 10 carefully selected prompts.
Interestingly, Elon Musk, the founder of xAI, also co-founded OpenAI with Sam Altman in 2015 but left the board in 2018. Then, it will be exciting to test Musk’s Grok and Altman’s ChatGPT side by side and see which one performs better.
Also, when you test both, it helps you figure out which model suits your needs best. You will also determine whether to use one for specific tasks or switch entirely.
If you’re an AI enthusiast, developer, tech professional, or just curious about how AI models like Grok 3 and ChatGPT compare, you’ll find my test results and final take in this article useful.
Key takeaways:
- It’s important to test Grok 3 and ChatGPT using real-life use cases before drawing conclusions.
- Grok 3 provides more detailed explanations for math problems, while ChatGPT offers a simpler solution that’s easier to digest for those struggling with math.
- ChatGPT generates better, more vibrant images compared to Grok 3, especially when color and creativity are important.
- The choice between Grok 3 and ChatGPT depends on the task at hand. Grok 3 is ideal for technical, detailed tasks, while ChatGPT works better for more casual, creative, or summary-based tasks.
Grok 3 vs. ChatGPT: Overview
Grok, developed by Elon Musk’s xAI, was first launched in November 2023 to a limited group of users and became open source in 2024. Since then, xAI has released several versions: Grok-1, Grok-1.5, Grok-2, Grok-2 Mini, Grok-3, and Grok-3 Mini, which came out in early 2025.
Grok-1 and Grok-1.5 are large language models and foundation models. Grok-2 is a multimodal, large language, and foundation model. Grok-3 builds on that by adding reasoning capabilities. If you’re using the Grok tab, you’ll find both Grok-3 and Grok-2 available.
Grok lets you choose how it responds—concise, formal, or socratic—so it can better support how you learn. It also offers a private chat tab that doesn’t appear in your history and won’t train the model. However, Grok may securely retain that data for up to 30 days for safety reasons. Additionally, it has a workspace feature.
On the other hand, OpenAI released ChatGPT back in 2022, ahead of Grok. It’s built on OpenAI’s Generative Pre-trained Transformer (GPT) models. The GPT-4o, which is multimodal, combines a large language model with foundation and generative pre-training. There’s also GPT-4o Mini, o1, o3-Mini, and GPT-4.5.
ChatGPT has an “Explore GPTs” tab where you can interact with custom GPTs built for specific tasks. You can turn memory on or off in ChatGPT. ChatGPT says it becomes more helpful the more you chat with it, picking up on details and preferences to tailor its responses. ChatGPT supports voice input and gives voice responses. Also, you can use the Canvas tab to collaborate on writing and coding.
Both Grok and ChatGPT are generative AI models with similar interfaces. You can use features like search, reason/think, and file uploads on both. They also support image generation, where ChatGPT uses DALL·E 3, while Grok uses the Aurora image model.
Also, using ChatGPT isn’t just with the free plan; there are Plus and Pro plans under the personal tier, for $20 and $200 per month, respectively. The Business plan for teams costs $25 per month.
Aside from Grok’s free version, you can also upgrade to SuperGrok, which costs $30 per month or $300 per year.
How I tested Grok 3 vs. ChatGPT
I use AIs like ChatGPT for a variety of tasks, including work, academics, learning, social interactions, fun, and personal activities. To get a response, you give the AI an input or instruction, often called a prompt, that guides it to generate a specific answer.
Prompts can come in different forms, like text or voice, and they need to be easy to understand, specific, and clear. The quality of your prompt can significantly impact the response you receive.
To test Grok 3 vs. ChatGPT, I selected 10 prompts that covered a wide range of scenarios. For each scenario, I gave the same prompt to both AIs and evaluated their responses based on how well they addressed the task. I focused on key factors like accuracy, creativity, clarity, and overall usability throughout the process. After collecting all the responses, I compared them to see which AI delivered the better result.
Well, with more AI models hitting the market, it’s no surprise that interest in comparisons is growing. And clearly, I’m not sitting this one out. People have shared their experiences on social media, often highlighting a particular feature or need that makes one AI stand out over the other.
But instead of relying on others’ opinions, I decided to do a Grok 3 vs. ChatGPT review myself using prompts in these key areas:
- Math
- Summary
- Coding
- Work emails
- Image generation
- Academic writing
- News
- Conversations
- History
- Marketing
For this comparison, I tested both AIs using their free web versions on Windows. I used the Grok 3 model for Grok and the GPT-4o model for ChatGPT.
Testing Grok 3 vs. ChatGPT with these 10 prompts
Grok 3 vs. ChatGPT in solving math problems
I gave Grok 3 and ChatGPT a quadratic equation to see how each would simplify and solve it. I wanted to understand how their approaches differ and how well they explain the steps.
- Prompt: If you’re my math teacher preparing me for my high school final exam, help me simplify and solve this quadratic equation (-4x² – 7x + 12 = 0). Give me a step-by-step solution with explanations, and include a few more examples I can practice with.
Grok 3’s response:
Grok 3 gave the solution using two different methods, with step-by-step instructions for each one. It delivered everything asked for in the prompt and felt more conversational. It also included a guide to help solve the practice questions using both methods, along with an exam tip at the end.
ChatGPT’s response:
ChatGPT broke the solution into steps and solved it using the quadratic formula. It gave everything asked for in the prompt, including practice questions. Its response was straightforward and well-spaced.
My winner: Grok 3 vs. ChatGPT for math
Both Grok 3 and ChatGPT gave the same answer using the quadratic formula. However, Grok 3 also solved it using the factoring method. If you struggle with math, ChatGPT offers a straightforward solution that doesn’t feel overwhelming. Grok 3 gave a more detailed explanation, so if you need a deeper understanding, it might be the better option. Though, I found Grok 3’s solution a bit overwhelming to go through.
Grok 3 vs. ChatGPT in generating a summary
While on the go, I saw a headline from Techpoint Africa that caught my attention. Since I couldn’t sit down to read the full story, I copied it into ChatGPT and asked for a summary. I did the same with Grok 3 to compare the results.
- Prompt: Give me a summary of this story in a way that I don’t miss the important details and understand it like I read the whole story.
“Africa leads the world with 1.1 billion mobile money accounts and $1.1 trillion in transactions
According to the GSMA’s State of the Industry Report on Mobile Money 2025, Africa is dominating the global mobile money revolution. The continent now boasts over 1.1 billion registered mobile money accounts, representing more than half of the world’s total and a surge from the 395.7 million in 2019.
In 2024 alone, African users conducted transactions worth $1.1 trillion, underscoring the pivotal role mobile money plays in the continent’s financial ecosystem.
The surge in mobile money adoption is particularly pronounced in East and West Africa, regions that have been instrumental in driving new registrations and active usage. East Africa, for instance, has been at the forefront, with countries like Kenya and Tanzania leading the charge in integrating mobile financial services into daily life.
West African nations, including Nigeria and Ghana, are rapidly catching up, reflecting a continent-wide embrace of digital financial solutions.
This widespread adoption has had a tangible impact on Africa’s economy. By the end of 2023, mobile money services had contributed approximately $190 billion to sub-Saharan Africa’s GDP, highlighting the sector’s significant economic influence.
The versatility of mobile money platforms has been a key factor in their success. Initially designed for simple person-to-person transfers, these platforms have evolved to offer a suite of financial services, including credit, savings, and insurance.
As of June 2024, 44% of mobile money providers offered credit services, while around a third provided savings options. Insurance services, though less prevalent, were available through approximately 28% of providers.
Despite these advancements, challenges remain. A notable gender gap persists in mobile money ownership across several African countries, with limited awareness and low digital financial literacy cited as significant barriers, particularly for women. Addressing these issues is crucial to ensuring inclusive financial growth across the continent.
Africa’s leadership in mobile money adoption reflects the continent’s innovative approach to financial inclusion and underscores the transformative potential of digital financial services in driving economic development.”
Grok 3’s response:
Grok 3’s response felt too elaborate for a summary. It gave a 253-word version of the original 341-word article. Still, it included the key details I needed.
ChatGPT’s response:
ChatGPT’s summary gave the key details, including the numbers mentioned in the story, and bulleted some points. It summarized the original piece of over 300 words down to 197 words.
My winner: Grok 3 vs. ChatGPT for summary
Reading both summaries felt like reading the full article. But if you want a summary that actually saves you from the lengthy version, ChatGPT might be the better choice. On the other hand, Grok 3’s summary was longer compared to ChatGPT’s.
Grok 3 vs. ChatGPT as a coding assistant
Since I’m not a developer, I didn’t just throw in a random coding question. Instead, I searched for a real-world code issue. I reached out to my developer friends and found one I could work with. Then, I fed the same problem to both AIs and evaluated how each broke down the solution.
- Prompt: Check this issue: “onst totalReferralsPoints =
referrals?.pages?.flatMap(
(page) => page.additionalInfo?.totalReferralsPoints
) || 0; ”
useInfinitequery was used in fetching, and a variable solution is not coming up. Tell what the error is and give how to solve it, breaking down everything, including the technical solutions. Let it be as accurate as possible.
Grok 3’s response:
Grok started with an introduction to understand the error. Then it gave a detailed explanation of the code provided. After that, it identified potential errors and offered a solution for each one. Finally, it gave corrected versions of the code in both JavaScript and TypeScript. It also explained why the solution works.
ChatGPT’s response:
ChatGPT broke down the problem, suggested a possible cause, explained it, and gave a solution. It also shared reasons why the solution works and included a TypeScript version.
My winner: Grok 3 vs. ChatGPT for coding
Even as a non-developer, I could understand the solutions provided by Grok 3, as they were clearly broken down. Grok 3’s responses were more detailed compared to ChatGPT’s. Based on the two outputs, I believe developers would most likely choose Grok 3 as a coding assistant.
However, keep in mind that my take is based on how they responded, not necessarily on which one provided the most accurate or functional solution.
Grok 3 vs. ChatGPT in writing work emails
I wasn’t having the best day at work, and I needed to write an email welcoming students who just signed up for Cohort 2 of our tech education program. The task must be done, and if I have to get it right, then I need assistance
- Prompt: Write a welcome message for students who signed up for our tech program, including all the details that should be in a welcome email. Make it warm and build anticipation, as the start date will be announced soon.
Grok 3’s response:
Grok 3 gave a good response I can work with. However, I’d need to edit it and cut down the word count to make it a good length for email, something readers won’t find boring before they get to the important information. It also generated dummy links where I needed real ones.
ChatGPT’s response:
The response from ChatGPT gave me what I was looking for: a warm tone and a sense of anticipation. It also didn’t forget to mention that the start date would be announced soon. All I would have to do is remove a few AI-flagged words and check for any generic, robotic-sounding sentences.
My winner: Grok 3 vs. ChatGPT for work emails
Grok 3’s response felt a bit long compared to ChatGPT. While I could use it, ChatGPT’s version was more direct and gave the tone and emotion I needed for the email. It was also easier to edit and fit to my plan than Grok 3’s response.
Grok 3 vs ChatGPT for image generation
I needed a book cover for a story I had written, so I decided to generate the image using AI. I then provided the AI with the book details in a prompt and observed which one would give me what I wanted.
- Prompt: Give me a book cover for my billionaire love story that has a business or company theme, displaying a male and female character holding hands and walking down the aisle of a 5-star company.
Grok 3’s response:
Grok generated the image faster than it generated the text. It gave me an image I could work with and even tagged the image details in its response. Also, it offered two options in landscape, which is a nice touch.
ChatGPT’s response:
ChatGPT generated a colorful image that matched the prompt well. It didn’t give multiple options, but the one it created looked good and in portrait.
My winner: Grok 3 vs. ChatGPT for image generation
ChatGPT won this round for me. The image was more colorful and vibrant compared to Grok’s. Even though it didn’t offer multiple options, the result fit better with the prompt I gave both AIs.
Grok 3 vs. ChatGPT for academic writing
I often have academic writing tasks to complete, and for this comparison, I chose a literature review assignment to test how well each AI handles academic writing.
- Prompt: As an expert academic writer, I want you to conduct a thorough review of the existing research on the impact of artificial intelligence on academic writing. Follow academic writing standards, use APA citation style, and include all relevant components of a literature review.
Grok 3’s response:
Grok gave a thorough answer to the prompt, including everything from an abstract to references. It even added a “methodology” section. It showed the response covered 25 web pages and included links to those pages at the beginning.
ChatGPT’s response:
ChatGPT gave a good response that works well for a typical academic writing assignment. However, it wasn’t as detailed as Grok’s. I didn’t use the prompt on the web search mode; it didn’t display sources but added links in the reference section.
My winner: Grok 3 vs. ChatGPT for academic writing
I give this round to Grok 3. It included sections that ChatGPT left out, like the abstract, methodology, and discussion. Grok 3 gave a more complete response and even listed the web pages it pulled information from. That said, ChatGPT’s response could still work if your assignment doesn’t require a lot of detail.
Grok 3 vs. ChatGPT for news updates
Due to my tight work schedule and weekends that feel like two days compressed into 12 hours, I barely catch up with recent events. I often feel lost when my friends talk about global and local happenings I should know about. Sometimes, I turn to ChatGPT for information, but this time, I’ll compare its response with Grok 3.
- Prompt: I’m lost on the China and USA tariff dispute. Help me understand what it’s about and walk me through the incident from the beginning until now.
Grok 3’s response:
Grok 3 gave a detailed breakdown of the tariff dispute, starting with an introduction that summarized everything up to recent developments. It then walked through key events right up to the time of writing this article. It added helpful statistics to improve understanding, along with web sources pulled from both websites and social media.
ChatGPT’s response:
ChatGPT also did a good job. It gave a rundown based on key years, administrations, or major events, which helped follow the situation from the beginning. However, ChatGPT didn’t go deep into the trade war for recent happenings. Its response felt a bit too surface-level. Meanwhile, using the same prompt in search mode gives a better result and even includes a graph.
My Winner: Grok 3 vs. ChatGPT for news updates
Grok 3 has this round. It gave a more thorough response, complete with stats that made things easier to grasp. It also covered recent events just like I wanted. While ChatGPT gave a good overview, Grok 3 clearly did a better job here.
Grok 3 vs. ChatGPT in having a conversation
To see which AI is more conversational, I came up with a few conversation lines to test how they would respond.
- Prompt:
- Hi, you can call me Joyce. Do you have a special name you’d like me to call you?
- Okay, that’s fine. The sun is out for everyone today. I’ve already drunk two bottles of water. What else do you think I should do?
- Thank you for that. A coworker is approaching me right now. How can I avoid having a conversation with them because I’m not in the mood?
- Thank you. Given how stressed I feel already, I’m unsure what instant food I can prepare for dinner. Do you have any suggestions?
Grok 3’s response:
Grok gave more information throughout the conversation, both in the intro and the closing of each chat, which I liked. But honestly, it felt tedious to read. It came off more like plain text than an actual conversation.
ChatGPT’s response:
ChatGPT often adds emojis, which makes the content easier and more fun to read. The use of emojis made the chat feel more conversational. It also used friendly phrases that gave it a warmer tone. Overall, it gave a good conversational experience. When I shared my name, it showed a notification saying it updated and saved that info in memory.
My Winner: Grok 3 vs. ChatGPT in having a conversation
When it comes to having a conversation, I prefer ChatGPT more than Grok 3. The chat with ChatGPT felt smooth and entertaining, while Grok’s response came off a bit too serious. Still, Grok did give some helpful extra info.
Grok 3 vs. ChatGPT in learning about history
You won’t hear me say I love history that much, probably because it can be pretty boring sometimes. But for this test, I asked the AI to tell me about a historical figure like it was an exciting story.
- Prompt: Briefly tell me about the life of Abraham Lincoln like an interesting story in no more than 500 words.
Grok 3’s response:
Grok gave more details and presented the answer as a story. It didn’t leave out key points and still stayed within the word count. It even summed the total word count at the end. The storytelling wasn’t basic but was quite captivating.
ChatGPT’s response:
ChatGPT gave a lighter response that was easy to read and follow. It stayed within the 500-word count request and wrapped up the story in about 350 words. The intro also had a storytelling touch, which I liked. Unlike Grok, it didn’t sum up the entire word count afterwards.
My Winner: Grok 3 vs. ChatGPT in learning about history
I’ll split the trophy here, and here’s why. If you’re looking for something simple and easy to read, ChatGPT wins. But when it comes to detail, Grok delivered more. Both responses stayed under 500 words as requested, but Grok added a few extra events that ChatGPT left out.
Creativity-wise, ChatGPT kept things straightforward and didn’t rely on heavy literary language. Grok, on the other hand, told the story with more flair and used intriguing literary elements. Overall, Grok did a better job in this round. Still, both tools could work great for creative writing; it all depends on what you’re looking for.
Grok 3 vs. ChatGPT for marketing
Planning marketing campaigns for holidays and festive seasons is one of the core tasks of a marketer. I wanted to see which AI would perform best when it comes to planning a marketing campaign.
- Prompt: Prepare a Christmas marketing campaign for my small footwear business that my team can execute, and provide a timeline for execution.
Grok 3’s response:
Grok’s response gave a good head start, and I liked how it broke things down between content delivery and campaign events. Also, it compared last year’s sales for the same period to help set a goal. It also included a post-campaign analysis to evaluate performance and compare it against the original goal.
ChatGPT’s response:
ChatGPT’s response looked more organized, easier to engage with, and straightforward, but it didn’t go into much detail. Still, if you’re a marketer, you can quickly grasp the key points and get to work.
My Winner: Grok 3 vs. ChatGPT for marketing
Grok 3 gave more details than ChatGPT, especially with things like the post-campaign analysis. That said, ChatGPT still got the job done. It shared some points that any marketer would find useful. Since a good marketing campaign needs to be detailed, I’d actually recommend using both. You can combine the strongest points from each to create a more well-rounded plan. And honestly, if you provide more specific brand details, both tools will likely deliver even better, more tailored results.
Overall performance at a glance: Grok 3 vs. ChatGPT
| S/N | Grok 3 vs. ChatGPT review | My winner/verdict |
| 1 | Solving math problems | If you struggle with math, ChatGPT offers a straightforward solution that doesn’t feel overwhelming.Grok 3 provided a more detailed explanation, which is helpful if you need a deeper understanding. |
| 2 | Generating a summary | If you want a summary that actually saves you from the lengthy version, ChatGPT might be the better choice.Grok 3’s summary was longer compared to ChatGPT’s. |
| 3 | Coding assistant | Grok 3’s responses are more detailed compared to ChatGPT’s.Based on the two outputs, you’d likely pick Grok 3 as a coding assistant if you were a developer. |
| 4 | Writing work emails | Grok 3’s response was too long for a work email.ChatGPT captured the tone and emotion needed for the email, and it would be easier to edit ChatGPT’s response and fit it into the plan than Grok 3’s response. |
| 5 | Generating an image | ChatGPT generated a better image. The image was more colorful and vibrant compared to Grok’s. |
| 6 | Academic writing | I give this round to Grok 3. It included sections that ChatGPT left out. |
| 7 | News updates | Grok 3 did a better job here. It gave a more thorough response, with numbers and covered recent events |
| 8 | Conversation | When it comes to having a conversation, I prefer ChatGPT more than Grok 3. |
| 9 | History | If you want something simple and easy to read, ChatGPT wins.For a detailed response, which included more key events, Grok delivered better.On creativity, both tools can work well for creative writing; it just depends on what you’re looking for. |
| 10 | Marketing | Since a strong marketing campaign needs to be detailed, I’d recommend using both tools. You can combine the strongest points from each to create a more well-rounded campaign. |
Conclusion
Testing both Grok 3 and ChatGPT across different scenarios gave a clearer picture of how each one performs depending on the task. Grok 3 handled technical prompts like coding and math problems better. It gave longer, more detailed answers and often included web sources, especially for topics like news, marketing, and technical writing.
ChatGPT, on the other hand, kept responses more concise and occasionally skipped a few details. It worked better for tasks like image generation, summarizing content, and casual conversation. In some cases ChatGPT seems to have a better understanding of the prompt and what is expected, especially for simple prompts. Additionally, aside from response to prompts, ChatGPT has more features compared to Grok. To get better results, use ChatGPT in search mode. Compared to a regular search, search mode provides better results.
Now that you’ve seen how both perform across different tasks, you’ll know how to prompt them and when to use each one. Also, a well-written prompt can seriously improve the quality of the response you get.
Still wondering which AI model to stick with? Well, the right choice depends on what you’re trying to do. In the end, switching models isn’t always the answer. Instead, go with the one that best handles your specific task, unless your daily workflow consistently plays to the strength of just one.
Disclaimer!
This publication, review, or article (“Content”) is based on our independent evaluation and is subjective, reflecting our opinions, which may differ from others’ perspectives or experiences. We do not guarantee the accuracy or completeness of the Content and disclaim responsibility for any errors or omissions it may contain.
The information provided is not investment advice and should not be treated as such, as products or services may change after publication. By engaging with our Content, you acknowledge its subjective nature and agree not to hold us liable for any losses or damages arising from your reliance on the information provided.
