With the launch of Grok 3 in the AI’s landscape, another storm begins between Grok 3, DeepSeek, and ChatGPT. DeepSeek is already surprising with its new models V3, R1, and Janus-Pro. Elon Musk claims Grok 3 is the smartest AI on Earth. These claims are becoming true as its benchmarks are shared by the xAI team at the launch event. Outperforming all the competitors in the market.
However, Grok 3 is only accessible by Premium+ account members it costs $40/per month, which is more expensive than ChatGPT’s Plus subscription, spending much is it worth for your day-to-day usage, this comparison based on the speed test, writing test, content creation test and many more. The research is based on various YouTube video references.
Without any further ado, let’s begin our comparisons with prompts.
Speed Test: Python Script Challenge
The first test was straightforward: write a Python script to simulate a ball bouncing inside a spinning tesseract. A creative and complex task that evaluates how well these models handle technical challenges.
| Model | Response Speed | Output Quality | Issues |
|---|---|---|---|
| Grok 3 | Lightning-fast | Accurate, functional code | None |
| ChatGPT (GPT-3.5) | Slower than Grok | Code produced errors on execution | Minor debugging required |
| DeepSeek R1 | Failed to respond | N/A | Server issues; unable to test effectively |
Insights: Grok 3 outshone the competition with its incredible speed and flawless script execution. ChatGPT, while slower, needed debugging to make its code work. DeepSeek’s performance was disappointing due to server errors.
Writing Test: Landing Page Creation
The next challenge required each model to create a one-page landing website for a niche video SEO ranking service. This tested creative and practical writing skills alongside HTML generation.
| Model | HTML Readiness | Design Quality | Issues |
| Grok 3 | Ready-to-use HTML | Fast and functional, though design was basic | Color schemes and styling could improve |
| ChatGPT (GPT-3.5) | HTML with minor bugs | Decent, but some styling errors | Black font on black background |
| DeepSeek R1 | Basic Markdown output | Incomplete HTML; lacked CSS styling | Server issues persisted |
Insights: While Grok 3 provided a reasonably designed landing page with functional elements, its choice of colors and layout left room for improvement. ChatGPT’s output had significant design flaws, such as black text on a black background. DeepSeek’s performance was disappointing, with neither the online nor local version producing meaningful results.
Content Creation Test: SEO-Optimized Articles
This task evaluated each model’s ability to write a long-form article optimized for SEO with a focus on readability and engagement.
| Model | Word Count | Humanization | SEO Relevance |
| Grok 3 | 841 words | Highly humanized; conversational tone | Excellent keyword optimization |
| ChatGPT (GPT-4) | 645 words | Somewhat engaging, but less humanized | Good, but slightly formal |
| DeepSeek R1 | Incomplete content | Mechanical tone; lacked depth | Limited relevance |
Insights: Grok 3’s output was impressively human-like, with engaging headlines and a natural flow. ChatGPT performed decently but fell short in word count and humanization compared to Grok 3. DeepSeek, once again, failed to deliver a competitive result.
Coding Test: Space Invaders Game
In this challenge, the models were tasked with creating a simple Space Invaders game using HTML, CSS, and JavaScript. Let’s look at how they performed:
| Model | Code Quality | Game Functionality | Issues |
| Grok 3 | Functional but basic | Few enemies; limited movements | Needed more gameplay elements |
| ChatGPT (GPT-3.5) | More polished game | Multiple enemies with better dynamics | Slower coding process |
| DeepSeek R1 | Failed to respond | N/A | Could not complete the task |
Insights: ChatGPT edged out Grok 3 in this challenge, delivering a more advanced and functional game. While Grok 3’s game was simpler and lacked certain elements, its speed was unmatched. DeepSeek failed to produce usable results, continuing its trend of underperformance.
AI Detectability Test
This test assessed how easily AI-generated content could be detected by AI-detection tools. Each model was given the task of creating generic, fluffy content and then reworking it to bypass AI detectors.
| Model | AI Detection Score (Initial) | AI Detection Score (Revised) | Notes |
| Grok 3 | 100% detectable | Reduced to 20% | Effective humanization techniques |
| ChatGPT (GPT-3.5) | 100% detectable | Reduced to 30% | Moderate improvements |
| DeepSeek R1 | 100% detectable | No significant improvement | Limited ability to revise content |
Insights: Grok 3 excelled in this task, creating rewritten content that was entirely undetectable as AI-generated. ChatGPT came close but still showed slight traces of AI. DeepSeek did not produce usable content.
Final Verdict: Which AI Wins?
After evaluating Grok 3, DeepSeek, and ChatGPT across various tasks, here’s a summary of their strengths and weaknesses:
| Model | Strengths | Weaknesses |
| Grok 3 | lightning-fast, highly humanized content, effective coding | Limited design creativity, occasional oversimplifications |
| ChatGPT | Polished coding for complex tasks, reliable content creation | Slower than Grok, less engaging tone |
| DeepSeek | Potential for advanced reasoning (theoretical) | Persistent server issues, incomplete outputs |
Overall Winner: Grok 3 emerges as the strongest contender in terms of speed, humanization, and versatility. However, ChatGPT holds its own in tasks requiring depth and coding finesse. DeepSeek, while promising, is hampered by technical limitations.
Personal Insights
From the tasks performed, it’s clear that AI tools have made incredible strides, but no model is perfect. Grok 3’s speed is its standout feature, making it ideal for time-sensitive tasks. On the other hand, ChatGPT’s nuanced coding abilities and polished results shine in creative projects. DeepSeek, while lagging behind currently, could become a strong contender with improvements to its infrastructure.
For most users, Grok 3 and ChatGPT are both excellent choices depending on your needs. If speed and readability are your priority, Grok 3 is the way to go. If you need more refined coding or structured content, ChatGPT might be your best bet. As for DeepSeek, it’s worth keeping an eye on as it matures.
In the end, the “smartest AI” is the one that aligns best with your specific requirements. The race isn’t over yet—innovation is ongoing, and all three models have room to grow.
If you have any other AI comparison in mind, feel free to comment, I will be happy to compare.
I’m Ryker Alden, a writer, and contributor at DeepSeek Insider, where I craft queries, troubleshoot problems and create accessible tutorials. With a passion for artificial intelligence, machine learning, and large language models (LLMs), I focus on breaking down complex AI concepts into clear, simple language to engage and educate a broad audience.