ChatGPT Vs. Gemini Vs. Claude: What Are The Differences?

Chatbots have changed many professionals’ workflows and processes. Accountants, lawyers, SEO experts, writers, agencies, developers, and even teachers are still discussing the changes taking place in their field thanks to tools like ChatGPT, Gemini, and Claude.

If you want to search for information, need help fixing bugs in your CSS, want to create something as simple as a robots.txt file, or need shopping recommendations, chatbots may be able to help.

They’re also wonderful for topic ideation, allowing you to draft more interesting emails, newsletters, blog posts, and more.

But which chatbot should you use and learn to master? Which platform provides accurate, concise information?

Things have changed a lot since 2022, 2023, and even since the start of 2025.

Let’s find out where each platform stands today.

What Is The Difference Between ChatGPT, Gemini, And Claude?

ChatGPT Vs. Gemini Vs. Claude: Prompt Testing And Examples

Since technical SEO is an area I am passionate about, I wanted to see what the chatbots have to say when I put the following prompt in each:

What Are The Top 3 Technical SEO Factors I Can Use To Optimize My Site?

ChatGPT’s Response

ChatGPT provides a coherent, well-structured response to this query. The response does touch on three important areas of optimization:

• Site speed.
• Crawlability and indexability.
• Structure and schema markup.

When prompted to provide more information on site speed, we receive a lot of great information that you can use to begin optimizing your site.

But this is just the start of the recommendations offered. ChatGPT also recommended:

• How to test and monitor performance, along with four tools to use.
• How to optimize speed, with recommendations for optimizing images, using a content delivery network, caching, and minifying code.
• Advanced optimization for developers, such as preloading and fetching resources.

ChatGPT impressed me with a thorough response on site speed optimization. You can even create a checklist to receive step-by-step optimization instructions.

Gemini’s Response

Gemini’s responses are faster than ChatGPT and equally as informative.

The information is solid, and I appreciate that Google uses more formatting, tables, and bold parts in the responses to make them easier to read.

An interesting, and maybe self-serving tidbit, is that Gemini provided a next step that said: Do you have Google Search Console set up for your site? That’s the best tool to audit all three of these technical factors, especially Core Web Vitals and Indexing issues.

To try and keep things similar, I asked Gemini, “Can you provide more information on Site Speed & User Experience (Core Web Vitals)?”

Gemini came back with an extensive response, covering:

• Understanding Core Web Vitals (CWV): A full explanation of LCP, INP, and CLS was provided, along with what it measures, target scores, and what happens when it’s poor.
• Why CWV is Essential for SEO: Four examples were given, including page experience, mobile-first importance, lower bounce rate, and conversion impact.

Optimization recommendations were also provided, which I’ll show you below:

Gemini provides good responses for all of their recommendations, but you’ll need to dig deeper into them if you don’t know how some of these work. For example, minimizing main-thread work is far more complex for the average person and will require significantly more guidance.

But you can prompt it to learn how to minimize main-thread work or optimize your JavaScript properly.

I feel like ChatGPT beat out Gemini with this advanced response, more so because it was in-depth. Gemini feels like you’ll need to keep prompting it for some of the recommendations because they are more advanced.

Claude has been really strong as of late, especially with coding, but let’s see what it can do with technical SEO.

Claude’s Response

Claude’s answers are all pretty solid, but I found them more informative than actionable, which is something I appreciated in the past. While some tips are offered for each section, the aim seems to be to educate first and action second.

Let’s probe it a bit more on site speed with this question: “Can you provide more information on Page Speed & Core Web Vitals?”

Claude’s response is extensive, and this is just part of it.

What I didn’t show you to cut back on the screenshots is that Claude recommended tools (like it has done in the past) and quick wins to get the most out of optimization, such as compression and next-gen image formats.

Winner: Claude and ChatGPT win out, thanks to their extensive answers and mention of specific tools and actionable steps. Google shied away from recommending tools (other than its own), but they did provide links to find out more info.

I do want to mention Claude’s answer would be more valuable if they actually linked to tools, but they did not.

Advanced Prompt: I Have a Small Dog. Can You Recommend 5 Dog Beds for Them?

I wanted to test out ChatGPT’s “buy it in ChatGPT” feature, so this prompt will heavily favor the platform.

But it’s worth exploring a bit and seeing what happens in the future as Gemini and Claude catch up.

ChatGPT’s Response

ChatGPT starts with what to consider when choosing a bed for a small dog:

Decent information for a small dog, but I’m here for shopping, and this is where the response becomes interesting:

You can click on the bed, view pricing for multiple stores, but I didn’t buy anything to explore the feature any further.

Gemini’s Response

Gemini’s response is something between ChatGPT and Claude. The beds they recommend are all real and good options, but it’s odd no links were provided. I’m assuming Google wants to “get their cut” and will eventually either offer paid ads for products or receive commission for these recommendations.

I do want to mention that Google and PayPal have partnered to offer agentic commerce, which means they are following in the footsteps of ChatGPT.

But, for this query, I was given a decent response. So, what did I do? I asked Gemini why they won’t provide links, and the response was interesting:

If you ask Gemini to provide links, it tells you that it cannot. But if you run information queries, it often links sources.

Let’s see what happens with Claude.

Claude’s Response

Claude’s response was more basic, which is to be expected:

Claude did its best, and while the response is great if you’re looking for different types of beds, it’s still basic. But remember, this isn’t the platform’s strength. For general coding, I’ve found Claude to be better than ChatGPT.

Gemini feels like it’s holding back with providing “clickable links,” but I’m betting on this changing in the future.

Advanced Prompt: I Want To Become An Authority In SEO. What Steps Should I Take To Reach This Goal?

Up until this point, the prompts have been a bit easy. Let’s find out how each chatbot performs when we use more advanced prompts:

ChatGPT’s Response

ChatGPT’s new response is more robust than in the past. Interestingly, both produced nine points that were very similar.

I do like the recommendations for taking courses, gaining hands-on experience, and even places to read news on SEO.

Next up, let’s test the same query on Gemini.

Gemini’s Response

Gemini’s response is extensive, and they provide a solid list of recommendations. You’ll find places to guest post and tools to use in the recommendations. I would like to see more information about continuous learning on the first prompt, but there is only so much that it will provide without further probing.

Claude’s Response

Claude has a lot of good suggestions, and I especially like the mention of different courses you can take to learn the basics. In the past, when I ran this query, it mentioned certifications, which it seems to have ditched this time around.

But Claude did have a few recommendations on complementary skills to learn, which is neat:

Overall, the tips from all three chatbots were great. Claude could use a little help on the formatting end. ChatGPT and Gemini both provided a wealth of recommendations that you can then dive more into for a greater understanding.

Let’s try putting these chatbots to work on some tasks that I’m sure they can perform.

Advanced Prompt: Create A Robots.txt File Where I Block Google Search Bot, Hide My “Private” Folder, And Block The Following IP Address “123.123.123.123”

ChatGPT’s Response

ChatGPT listened to my directions, reiterated them to me, showed me what to do, explained that I cannot block IP addresses in my robots.txt, and then explained how to block them in .htaccess. I’m impressed.

Compared to past years, the formatting has also improved, especially with highlighting the code.

Gemini’s Response

Gemini did really well with this task, but there’s a problem. If you look at the robots.txt, it does block Googlebot and gives me a snippet to unblock Bingbot, but it’s also blocking all crawlers at the top by default, which is not what I asked.

What would happen if I asked the same thing, but blocked Bing instead? Will it recommend the same?

Let’s find out:

Is Gemini favoring Google? I don’t know, but it’s odd that in the second example, it blocked just Bingbot and not every user agent.

Conspiracy? Coincidence?

I’m not sure, and I won’t draw any conclusions without a much larger dataset.

Claude’s Response

Claude does really well, with a similar explanation on the robots.txt, which I’m happy all of the chatbots caught because it was an intentional prompt to see if they would mention it or not.

Gemini gets the worst rating on this one simply because (and this is why it’s important to check information) if you copied and pasted the robots.txt, you would block all user agents.

Now, let’s try a more fun, advanced prompt.

Advanced Prompt: What Are The Top 3 Destinations In Italy To Visit, And What Should I Know Before Visiting Them?

ChatGPT’s Response

All three recommendations remained the same over the years, but non-paid this year is closer to what ChatGPT Plus recommended the year prior. Even the phrasing was similar. I do think that the formatting has improved, too.

As a follow-up question, I asked what sunglasses to wear in Italy during my trip, and the response was:

In past years, some of these sunglasses were recommended, but with the addition of being able to view and even buy them in ChatGPT, it makes the experience so much better.

Gemini’s Response

Gemini did really well here, and the same format was given for:

If you’re curious what Bard (yes, the original version from Google) recommended years ago, here it is:

Gemini is lightyears ahead of Bard, and I really like how they put everything into a table to make it nice and neat. I even received tips on:

• Best times to visit.
• Dining.
• Getting around.
• What to wear.

When I asked about sunglasses to wear, it came up short compared to ChatGPT because it gives tips and recommendations, but there are no links to specific sunglasses to buy. See for yourself:

I was also told about popular brands in Italy, but without product links, it falls short.

Claude’s Response

All of the information is solid, but I kind of miss the format of last year’s results.

Claude’s response is impressive. Rome, Florence, and Venice are all mentioned.

Key attractions are provided, with additional tips for visiting, which are extremely helpful and accurate.

Tips provided were to:

• Learn the language.
• Validate train tickets.
• Be prepared for shops and restaurants to be closed in the afternoon.

And for the sunglasses query, you be the judge. Some of the recommendations on the list may be out of range for many travelers:

Decent tips with a follow-up question of where I am going in Italy. I did answer that question, and the platform told me a bit about the region.

From the formatting to the response, I feel like Claude has regressed this year.

Why?

Look at last year, where actual sunglasses were recommended, and I had nicely formatted responses:

Overall, I have to go with ChatGPT for this query because of its product links. In terms of information, Gemini was on par with ChatGPT, but Claude has regressed.

Which Chatbot Is Better At This Stage?

Each tool has its own strengths and weaknesses.

It’s clear that Gemini has gotten a lot better and leveled the playing field. Gemini has a nice UI, and I believe it has the potential to add links to products tomorrow if it wanted to.

Claude’s bot is very polished and ideal for people looking for in-depth answers with explanations, but don’t expect links back to sources for everything, even when web search is enabled. I also feel like the lack of formatting is an issue (for me, at least).

ChatGPT is the better option for shopping at the moment, but each has its strengths:

• ChatGPT is best for everyday answers, products, voice chat, and computer use.
• Gemini is best for deep research and video generation.
• Claude is best for writing and coding.

Hallucinations Can Happen

Chatbots can hallucinate, but they’re also very convincing in their responses. It’s important to heed the warning of the developers.

ChatGPT tells us:

Google tells us:

Claude also tells us:

If you’re using chatbots for anything requiring facts and studies, cross-check your work and verify that the facts and events actually happened.

There have been times when these hallucinations are apparent and other times when non-experts would easily be fooled by the response they receive.

Since chatbots learn from information, such as websites, they’re only as accurate as the information they receive – for now.

One study from February 2025 shows that 91% of chatbot news responses show problems. Double-check responses, as Gemini and Claude recommend, because bots get things wrong.

You can also find cases where:

• An Alabama lawyer was kicked off of a case because ChatGPT made up fake citations.
• A man was hospitalized because of asking ChatGPT about removing salt from his diet, leading him to replace sodium chloride with sodium bromide.

With all of these cautions in mind, let’s start prompting each bot to see which provides the best answers.

Summary

ChatGPT, Gemini, and Claude are all interesting tools, but what does the future hold for publishers and users? That’s something I cannot answer; no one can yet.

Initial results show that even if there are “more searches,” fewer people are getting referrals. Since July 2025, referrals from LLMs have been down by 42.6%, which is problematic for publishers and business owners who were hoping LLMs would direct traffic back to their sites.

More Resources:

---

Featured Image: Roman Samborskyi/Shutterstock