have been using all the main stream AI's and its been a fight between Grok, GPT and Claude for me. GPT 5 is currently 1st, Claude 2nd and Grok last... every other week this changes, its crazy how bad and good they can fluctuate....
Mark in the past I have used "Perplexity" for a few different things. I feel they user her as an AI search engine. I'm sure many have heard of her. Maybe the reason my wife perplexes me at times is the reason I have felt it is a her. I have only used GPT5 and "Perplexity" for different reasons.
Did you give Deepseek a try ? Claude is more like GPT and it doesn't beat Deepseek. I'll check windsurf. Still using VSCode. Ps: I am not Chinese nor Communist xD Just relying on my own experience around them. Feels like Claude & GPT don't read the docs. Sometimes they'll write pseudo code that won't run. "Oh yeah, those params don't even exist for that built in function !"
Perplexity did a good job.. To determine which of the two trading models performs best, let’s compare their overall performance using the following key metrics from the data provided in 0001.csv and 0002.csv: TotalProfit: Accumulated profit over all trades ProfitFactor: Ratio of gross profit to gross loss; a value >1 is considered profitable WinningTrades and LosingTrades: Count of profitable and losing trades AvgProfitPerContract: Average profit made per individual contract Performance Comparison Table Metric Model 0001.csv Model 0002.csv TotalProfit (final) $14,212.50 $14,212.50 ProfitFactor (final) 1.87 1.86 WinningTrades (final) 27 25 LosingTrades (final) 44 45 AvgProfit/Contract $200.18 $203.04 Key Insights Total Profit: Both models reach the same final TotalProfit, $14,212.50. Profit Factor: Model 0001.csv has a marginally higher ProfitFactor (1.87 vs. 1.86), suggesting slightly better risk-adjusted returns. Winning Trades: Model 0001.csv achieved 2 more winning trades than Model 0002.csv. Avg Profit per Contract: Model 0002.csv very slightly outperformed (by $2.86 per contract). Consistency: Model 0001.csv has a lower number of losing trades and a marginally better win/loss ratio. Conclusion Model 0001.csv performs the best overall due to: Slightly higher profit factor (better reward-to-risk) More winning trades and fewer losses Identical total profit as Model 0002.csv with better consistency While the average profit per contract is slightly higher in Model 0002.csv, the difference is minimal compared to the consistency and win ratio advantage of Model 0001.csv.
For coding for me personally my preferred frameworks and llms are as follows: 1) cursor cli (sonnet 4) 2) vs code / augment AI with sonnet 4 and gptg5 3) vs code / github copilot with sonnet 4 and gpt5 So, anthropic in my estimate at current offers the best coding assistant for both, backend and frontend development.
Can't disagree more. I tried them all and program every day for about 7-8 hours. For coding deepseek does not beat either gpt nor Claude, not even sonnet 4. I use mcp servers for documentation and both, gpt and sonnet 4 consult the context7 documentations frequently and follow best practices to the dot when asked. I love the competition though.