 |
Which AI Model Outperforms in Coding, Mechanics, and Algorithmic Precision— Which Model Delivers Real-World Precision?————- Wasn’t able to paste code due to reddit. I compared and ran various tests from puzzles to humanized writing all with comparison ———– The wealthy tech giants in the U.S. once dominated the AI market but DeepSeek’s release caused waves in the industry, sparking massive hype. However, as if that wasn’t enough, Qwen 2.5 emerged — surpassing DeepSeek in multiple areas. Like other reasoning models such as DeepSeek-R1 and OpenAI’s O1, Qwen 2.5-Max operates in a way that conceals its thinking process, making it harder to trace its decision-making logic This article puts ChatGPT, Qwen, and DeepSeek through their paces with a series of key challenges ranging from solving calculus problems to debugging code. Whether you’re a developer hunting for the perfect AI coding assistant, a researcher tackling quantum mechanics, or a business professional, today I will try to reveal which model is the smartest choice for your needs (and budget) Comparative Analysis of AI Model Capabilities:-1. ChatgptChatGPT, developed by OpenAI still remains a dominant force in the AI space, built on the powerful GPT-5 architecture and fine-tuned using Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF). It’s a reliable go-to for a range of tasks, from creative writing to technical documentation, making it a top choice for content creators, educators, and startups However, it’s not perfect. When it comes to specialized fields, like advanced mathematics or niche legal domains, it can struggle. On top of that, its high infrastructure costs make it tough for smaller businesses or individual developers to access it easily 2. DeepseekOut of nowhere, DeepSeek emerged as a dark horse in the AI race challenging established giants with its focus on computational precision and efficiency. Unlike its competitors, it’s tailored for scientific and mathematical tasks and is trained on top datasets like arXiv and Wolfram Alpha, which helps it perform well in areas like optimization, physics simulations, and complex math problems. DeepSeek’s real strength is how cheap it is ( no china pun intended 😤). While models like ChatGPT and Qwen require massive resources, Deepseek does the job with way less cost. So yeah you don’t need to get $1000 for a ChatGPT subscription 3. QwenAfter Deepseek who would’ve thought another Chinese AI would pop up and start taking over? Classic China move — spread something and this time it’s AI lol Qwen is dominating the business game with its multilingual setup, excelling in places like Asia, especially with Mandarin and Arabic. It’s the go-to for legal and financial tasks, and it is not a reasoning model like DeepSeek R1, meaning you can’t see its thinking process. But just like DeepSeek, it’s got that robotic vibe, making it less fun for casual or creative work. If you want something more flexible, Qwen might not be the best hang Testing Time: Comparing the 3 AI’s with Real-World IssuesTo ensure fairness and through evaluation, let’s throw some of the most hyped challenges like tough math problems, wild physics stuff, coding tasks, and tricky real-world questions — — — — — — — — — — — — 1. Physics: The Rotating Ball ProblemTo kick things off, let’s dive into the classic “rotating ball in a box” problem, which has become a popular benchmark for testing how well different AI models handle complex task Challenge: Simulate a ball bouncing inside a rotating box while obeying the laws of physicsPicture a 2d shape rotating in space. Inside, a ball bounces off the walls, staying within the boundaries and no external force. At first glance, it might seem simple, but accounting for gravity, constant rotation, and precise collision dynamics makes it a challenging simulation. You’d be surprised at how differently AI models tackle it Prompt:-Results:1. ChatGPT’s Output: Fast but FlawedWith Chatgpt I had high expectations. But the results? Let’s just say they were… underwhelming. While DeepSeek took its time for accuracy, ChatGPT instantly spat out a clean-looking script. The ball didn’t bounce realistically. Instead, it glitched around the edges of the box, sometimes getting stuck in the corners or phasing through the walls. It is clear that ChatGPT prefers speed over depth, delivers a solution that works — but only in the most basic sense Chatgpt’s Code:…………………………………………………………………………… submitted by /u/DecodeBuzzingMedium |
