Llama 3.1 vs ChatGPT-4o: Which AI Tool is Best? | 2024 Full Comparison

Introduction

Hello everyone, welcome back to our channel! Today, we will focus on two heavyweight AI models: Meta's Llama 3.1 and OpenAI's ChatGPT-4o. To help you fully understand the differences between these two AI models, we have created a scoring table with five comparison indicators based on actual test results to provide an objective score. Of course, I will also calculate the total score at the end of the article for your reference.

Introduction to the Contenders

Llama 3.1 is Meta AI's latest large-scale language model, known for its powerful language generation capabilities and openness. ChatGPT-4o, on the other hand, is OpenAI's flagship product which has performed well in various benchmark tests and is widely used in various fields.

After understanding the basic information, let's start with the first test.

Test 1: Text Generation

We asked both Llama 3.1 and ChatGPT-4o the same question to see the answers they would generate. The question was: “Based on everything you know, write a college essay of at least 3,000 words titled ‘Will AI replace humans?’” From the results, their generation speeds are similar; however, ChatGPT-4o provided two different answers with paragraph titles fitting the essay format well. Llama 3.1, although it also gave a title, didn't quite meet the standard college essay format but its content was up to par.

We asked another question: “I am a YouTube gaming video blogger. Please write a script on how to get high view counts.” Llama 3.1 gave us detailed script descriptions in camera language along with thoughtful tips. ChatGPT-4o also generated excellent content offering many valuable details. From this test, we found that both models can produce high-quality text, but ChatGPT-4o excels slightly in creative text generation.

Scores: Llama 3.1 - 4, ChatGPT-4o - 5

Test 2: Translation

First off, we checked how many languages these two models support. When we asked how many countries’ languages can you translate, ChatGPT-4o supports translations in 110 languages, while Llama 3.1 supports 100 languages with an additional 50 in some regions. However, this doesn't make a huge difference.

We sent them a longer piece of text to see how their translations stack up. From the test results, both models produced very natural Korean translations. There were just a few stylistic differences: Llama 3.1 was more diverse and friendly, perfect for a warm tone while ChatGPT-4o was more concise and could grab the audience's attention better. Each has its strengths and we ended up giving both a solid five out of five.

Scores: Llama 3.1 - 5, ChatGPT-4o - 5

Test 3: Arithmetic

Now on to the math test. Lately, there's been some buzz about whether 12.11 or 12.9 is greater. We put it to the test to see how they handle it. When we asked which is greater, 12.11 or 12.9, Llama 3.1 got it wrong initially. ChatGPT-4o also got it wrong at first but after a few more tries, it finally got it right. When we changed the question to “What is 12.11 - 12.9?” both gave the correct answers. So in terms of accuracy for this test, neither model was consistent.

Scores: Llama 3.1 - 3, ChatGPT-4o - 3

Test 4: Code Generation

If you are a programmer, these models can be extremely useful. Let’s start with our first question: "I want to develop a game similar to Contra. Please write a basic framework to get me started."

Llama 3.1 provided simpler code, easier for beginners to understand with comments explaining certain parts. ChatGPT-4o's code was more complex but better organized, defining separate classes for players, enemies, and bullets, enhancing reusability and maintainability. It also used constants to represent colors, speeds, and sizes, improving readability. Depending on your needs, you might choose Llama 3.1 for learning purposes or as a starting point, or ChatGPT-4o for a more practical, playable game with additional features and better organization.

Scores: Llama 3.1 - 4, ChatGPT-4o - 4

Test 5: Real-Time Search

Unfortunately, Llama 3.1 does not support real-time search but its multi-language conversation and long text capabilities are more than sufficient for daily needs. ChatGPT-4o, however, can perform real-time updates. For example, when asked “What happened in the recent Microsoft blue screen incident?” ChatGPT-4o provided a detailed explanation. We hope Llama 3.1 will achieve real-time search functionality soon, especially since it's free and open source, while ChatGPT-4o has usage restrictions.

Scores: Llama 3.1 - 4, ChatGPT-4o - 4

Final Scores

Out of a total of 25 points:

• Llama 3.1 scored 20
• ChatGPT-4o scored 21

Both Llama 3.1 and ChatGPT-4o are excellent AI models, each with its own merits. If you are a developer looking to deeply customize a model, Llama 3.1 is a great choice. If you need a powerful, easy-to-use AI tool, ChatGPT-4o might be more suitable for you. We look forward to seeing more powerful AI models emerging in the future, bringing us more convenience and surprises.

If you found this article helpful, please give it a thumbs up and don't forget to subscribe to our channel for more AI knowledge and tools.

Thank you for reading!