ChatGPT vs. Perplexity AI: Full Report and Comparison Comparison of Features, Capabilities, Pricing, and more (mid-2025)

ChatGPT and Perplexity AI serve different purposes but now compete on many fronts.

This report compares them in detail as of mid‑2025. ChatGPT, built by OpenAI, is a conversational assistant with strong reasoning, coding, and multimodal capabilities. It runs on GPT-4o and the advanced o-series models. Perplexity AI is a search-based answer engine, designed to deliver fast, source-cited results using models like GPT-4, Claude, and its own Sonar.

We analyze both tools across performance, real-time accuracy, writing, coding, voice, apps, pricing, enterprise support, and API access. ChatGPT excels in conversation, depth, and tool use; Perplexity focuses on speed, citations, and research. Each has free and paid plans, distinct UI styles, and unique strengths for developers and enterprises. In this report, we outline how they differ, where they overlap, and when one is better suited than the other.

Overview

ChatGPT is OpenAI’s conversational AI assistant, based on the GPT series of large language models. It excels at engaging, context-aware dialogue and a wide range of tasks from coding help to creative writing. ChatGPT is available via a chat interface on web and mobile apps, with free and paid tiers offering varying levels of model power and features. Notably, ChatGPT (especially with GPT-4 and newer “o-series” models) can handle complex reasoning, multimodal inputs (text, images, audio), and even generate images or analyze data in certain modes. OpenAI continuously updates ChatGPT with new models (e.g. GPT-4o “Omni”, GPT-4.5 preview, and the advanced o-series reasoning models) and features like web browsing, voice conversation, and plugin tools.

Perplexity AI is an AI-powered “answer engine” that combines a large language model with real-time web search. Launched in 2022, Perplexity is designed to enhance the search experience by providing direct answers with inline citations to source websites. It functions both as a chatbot and a search engine hybrid: users enter queries in natural language and receive answers synthesized from web results, with the ability to ask follow-up questions for context. Perplexity offers a free version (using a default proprietary model and web search) and a Pro subscription that unlocks more powerful models (including GPT-4 variants, Anthropic’s Claude, and Perplexity’s own models) and advanced features. It is available on web, iOS, Android, and even has a browser extension and Mac app, aiming to be a one-stop research assistant. In essence, ChatGPT is a general AI assistant (with knowledge derived from its training data and optional web access), whereas Perplexity is an AI-augmented search tool that emphasizes up-to-date information and source transparency.

In the sections below, we compare ChatGPT and Perplexity AI across major dimensions: performance, features, pricing, citations/browsing, user experience, language support, API access, model transparency, safety, offline/app capabilities, and enterprise/developer support. Each aspect is examined with the latest available information (as of mid-2025) and references to official documentation or announcements for accuracy.

Performance: Speed, Accuracy, and Reasoning

Speed: In general, ChatGPT’s response speed depends on the model used. The free version (now powered by a faster “GPT-4.1 mini” model) is quite responsive, while the more advanced GPT-4-based modes (available to Plus/Pro users) can be slower due to their complexity and rate limits. For instance, standard GPT-4 responses may take several seconds and OpenAI historically imposed caps (e.g. 40 messages/3 hours) on GPT-4 usage for Plus users, though the newer GPT-4o model significantly boosts speed by providing GPT-4-level intelligence at much faster generation rates. ChatGPT’s newer GPT-4o (“Omni”) model is designed to be much quicker while retaining high capability, making even free-tier interactions snappy for basic queries. Perplexity’s speed can vary depending on the selected mode: its default model responses are usually quick, since the system retrieves web results and summarizes them efficiently. When using advanced models like GPT-4 through Perplexity Pro, response times can be similar to ChatGPT GPT-4 (a few seconds or more for long answers). Perplexity’s “Best” mode will auto-select a model optimized for speed vs. thoroughness. In practice, Perplexity’s free answers often feel immediate and concise, whereas ChatGPT might take a bit longer but produce more verbose, detailed output by default. Both systems are capable of delivering answers under a minute for typical questions, but ChatGPT (with heavy models) may lag slightly behind Perplexity’s speed-first modes in exchange for depth. As one reviewer noted, Perplexity is tuned to deliver fast factual answers, whereas ChatGPT might “think” a bit longer to produce a more nuanced response.

Accuracy: Both AI systems are strong in accuracy for many domains, but they achieve this in different ways. ChatGPT relies on its trained knowledge (which, for GPT-4, includes vast data up to its knowledge cutoff) and any provided tools (like web search) to answer questions. It has excellent general knowledge and language understanding, especially with GPT-4 and GPT-4o – often reaching “GPT-4 level” intelligence even for free users via GPT-4o. However, without browsing enabled, ChatGPT can hallucinate facts or have outdated information (its internal knowledge has cutoffs, though GPT-4o and later models extended some knowledge and can use search when needed). Perplexity, on the other hand, was built to maximize factual accuracy by pulling directly from up-to-date sources. Every answer it gives is backed by web search results that are cited, which helps ensure the information is verifiable and current. For questions about current events, statistics, or specific facts, Perplexity tends to be very accurate and up-to-date, often more reliable than an unassisted ChatGPT response which might rely on stale training data. In a direct comparison, users found both ChatGPT and Perplexity “fairly accurate,” both scoring 4/5 on accuracy in tests, with Perplexity’s citations providing confidence in its answers. That said, if a question requires specialized reasoning or knowledge integration rather than retrieval, ChatGPT (especially with advanced models) may have an edge in accuracy of reasoning (see next point).

Reasoning Abilities: This is where ChatGPT’s latest models truly shine. OpenAI has a line of “o-series” models (like OpenAI o1, o3, etc.) dedicated to complex reasoning tasks. OpenAI o3, introduced in 2025, is described as “our most powerful reasoning model” with state-of-the-art performance on coding, math, science problems and the ability to chain complex logic. These advanced reasoning models can even use tools (e.g. web browsing, Python code execution) agentically to solve multi-step problems, and they significantly reduce errors on hard tasks compared to earlier models. ChatGPT Plus users have access to the o-series (o1 preview was rolled out, and by 2025 ChatGPT Pro users can even use o3-pro, the top-tier version requiring extra compute for the hardest questions). This means for logic puzzles, detailed analysis, coding challenges, or reasoning-intensive queries, ChatGPT (with GPT-4/GPT-4.5 or o-models) demonstrates exceptional performance – often at or beyond human-expert level on benchmarks. Perplexity, by contrast, focuses on sourcing information rather than deeply “thinking” through a problem from first principles. Its own proprietary model (called Sonar, based on Llama architecture) is tuned for search and may not match GPT-4 in complex logical reasoning. While Perplexity Pro can leverage GPT-4 and even OpenAI’s o1/o3 models to improve reasoning (Pro users can choose OpenAI o1 or o3 for tough queries, albeit with slower response times), the system as a whole is not as optimized for multi-step chain-of-thought reasoning as ChatGPT’s environment. In fact, a hands-on comparison found that “Perplexity lacks advanced reasoning abilities and the ability to engage in human-like conversations” that ChatGPT excels at. ChatGPT is better at things like developing a novel solution, writing code from scratch, or carrying on a complex dialogue to reason out an answer, thanks to its training and larger context windows. Perplexity can tackle analytical questions using its “Reasoning Mode” (which employs models like OpenAI’s o-series, Claude’s advanced mode, or its in-house R1 model for uncensored analysis), and this allows multi-step web searches to break down complicated queries. However, those features are mostly available to Pro/Max subscribers. In summary, ChatGPT’s top models currently have a slight edge in pure reasoning and creative problem-solving, whereas Perplexity’s strength is in factual research and quick answers.

Summary: For everyday queries and simple tasks, both systems are fast and sufficiently accurate. ChatGPT (especially with GPT-4/o-series) tends to produce more detailed, context-rich answers and shows superior reasoning and conversational depth, albeit sometimes a bit slower on the most advanced models. Perplexity provides crisp, fact-focused answers with sources, usually faster for informational queries, and excels at anything requiring real-time knowledge. Many users use ChatGPT as a “brainstorming and problem-solving partner” and Perplexity as a “research and fact-checking tool,” which highlights how their performance profiles differ. Notably, the gap is closing as each service learns from the other – for instance, ChatGPT’s integration of web search narrows the factual accuracy advantage of Perplexity, while Perplexity’s offering of OpenAI’s latest reasoning model (o1/o3) to Pro users narrows the reasoning gap.

Use Cases and Features

Both ChatGPT and Perplexity AI have evolved into multi-faceted AI assistants, but they maintain different core strengths. Below is a breakdown of major use cases and distinctive features for each:

• General Q&A and Information Retrieval: Perplexity is purpose-built for answering questions by searching the web. If you ask “What are the latest GDP figures for France?” or “Who won the soccer match yesterday?”, Perplexity will retrieve recent data/news and give you a cited answer. It functions like an AI search engine, which makes it ideal for research, fact-checking, and current events. ChatGPT’s responses to the same questions (without browsing) might be outdated or guessed. However, with the introduction of ChatGPT’s web Search feature in late 2024, ChatGPT can now also fetch timely information and even provide sources for its answers. This means ChatGPT can handle informational queries more reliably than before, blending its conversational style with real-time facts. Still, if your goal is a concise answer with references, Perplexity often gets you there in one step – it was described as “a potential substitute for Googling” due to this strength. ChatGPT might require you to explicitly enable search or ask follow-ups to verify facts, whereas Perplexity’s default is to include references in the answer.

• Conversational Assistance and Writing: ChatGPT is unparalleled in sustaining a human-like conversation. It remembers context within a chat, adapts to the user’s tone, and can produce creative and personalized responses. For example, ChatGPT can role-play a historical figure, draft a story or poem in a certain style, or have an open-ended philosophical discussion. Its ability to “interact like a human” and personalize its tone is highlighted as a key strength. Perplexity does allow follow-up questions in a conversational thread, and it will use the context of your previous query to refine results. However, its replies tend to be more to-the-point and factual. It doesn’t naturally generate long, imaginative narratives or playful dialogue unless specifically prompted to (and even then, it may prioritize factual correctness over creativity). In practice, ChatGPT is the better choice for open-ended, creative, or dialog-oriented use cases (writing stories, brainstorming ideas, getting explanations of complex concepts in a friendly tone) while Perplexity is optimized for brief, informative exchanges. For instance, one test showed ChatGPT giving a nuanced, friendly weather commentary (with tips about sunscreen and jackets), whereas Perplexity gave a straightforward weather report with numbers and no extra commentary. Both were accurate, but the styles differ.

• Coding and Technical Assistance: Both can assist with coding, but ChatGPT has a dedicated focus on this area. ChatGPT (with GPT-4 or GPT-4.1) is exceptional at programming tasks – it can write code, debug, explain algorithms, and even step through problems. OpenAI’s GPT-4.1 model is “optimized for coding tasks”, and ChatGPT’s interface includes features like formatting code in markdown, making it easy to copy. Moreover, ChatGPT Plus offers Advanced Data Analysis (formerly known as Code Interpreter), which actually executes Python code in a sandbox – letting ChatGPT generate plots, analyze datasets, and perform computations during the chat. This is a unique capability: you can upload a CSV and ask ChatGPT to find insights, and it will run code to do so, then explain the results. Perplexity can certainly help with coding questions (especially if using the GPT-4 model via Pro), and it even has a “Labs” feature where it can generate things like small web applications, dashboards, or spreadsheets based on prompts. Labs in Perplexity orchestrates multiple tools to fulfill a complex request – akin to an agent that can search, calculate, and present results. However, Perplexity does not give users a live coding environment in the interface; it will provide code solutions or even use its internal tools to produce outputs (like a chart), but it won’t execute arbitrary code for the user in real-time as ChatGPT’s Advanced Data Analysis can. Thus, for hands-on coding help and data science work, ChatGPT is typically more powerful. On the other hand, Perplexity’s Labs are great for automating certain multi-step tasks (for example, creating a research report with sources, or comparing products and compiling a table), without the user having to prompt step-by-step. This makes Perplexity useful for data aggregation and presentation tasks.

• Multimodal Interaction: ChatGPT has made significant strides in multimodality. GPT-4 and GPT-4o can accept image inputs – you can upload a photo or diagram and ask ChatGPT about it (e.g. “What does this chart mean?” or “Translate this sign”). ChatGPT can also generate images now: it integrated DALL·E 3 for Plus users in late 2023, and by March 2025, the GPT-4o model itself could directly produce images as part of its output. Users can ask ChatGPT to “draw” or create an image and it will comply (with appropriate safeguards). Additionally, ChatGPT supports voice conversations – you can speak to it and hear it respond in a natural voice (available on mobile and the desktop app). This voice mode was shown to be so advanced that one user described using ChatGPT’s real-time translation during travel as “the most compelling AI experience”. Perplexity has also added voice input: you can talk to the mobile app and it will process your query. It offers an “advanced voice mode” for Pro users, though reports suggest it’s not as good as ChatGPT’s for interactive dialogue. In terms of vision, Perplexity’s mobile Assistant can use the phone camera to identify surroundings or on-screen content. For example, you could show Perplexity a picture of a plant and ask what it is – similar to Google Lens functionality. Both systems can thus handle images in input. For output, Perplexity Pro lets users generate images as well, by tapping into models like DALL·E 3, Stable Diffusion (Playground AI/SDXL), etc., from within the chat. It may present relevant images or videos from the web alongside answers (especially for certain queries like travel or shopping, it might show thumbnails). Overall, ChatGPT’s multimodal features are more integrated (text, image, audio all in one model), whereas Perplexity uses a combination of tools and APIs to achieve multimodal interaction (e.g., pulling images via search or using separate generation models).

• Personalization and Memory: In a long chat, ChatGPT is very adept at maintaining context – you can refer back to earlier parts of the conversation, and it will remember what you said (within the limit of the model’s context window). The new ChatGPT “Memory” feature allows the AI to remember certain preferences across chats (if enabled), making it more personalized in responses. For example, you could tell ChatGPT “I am a vegetarian” and it will try to remember this preference in future suggestions. Perplexity’s threads do carry context forward while they are open, but the system is not as oriented towards personalization. It does not have a long-term memory of the user’s profile (each new thread starts fresh). Also, ChatGPT allows users to save and revisit past conversations easily (chat history on the sidebar), label them, etc. Perplexity’s interface is more like a search engine – it does list recent queries and you can scroll the Q&A, but it does not archive full “chat” sessions for later (however, it has a feature called “Pages” or “Spaces” where you can save and share a compilation of answers or a research topic). Perplexity Spaces, along with a community Discover feed, let users publish their AI-generated research or answers for others to see, somewhat analogous to sharing a ChatGPT conversation, but more structured. ChatGPT’s equivalent is the ability to create custom GPTs (chatbot personas or tools) and share them via the GPT Store. Both platforms thus have emerging community and customization features: ChatGPT enables user-created tailored AI agents (“GPTs”) within its app, while Perplexity lets users create shareable Q&A pages and see others’ posts.

• Specialized Domains: ChatGPT, by virtue of fine-tuning (OpenAI offers fine-tuned GPT-3.5 models) and plugins, can be extended to many domains – e.g. medical advice (with appropriate disclaimers), legal reasoning, etc. Professionals might use ChatGPT for drafting emails, summarizing documents, or as a coding co-pilot. Perplexity, with its integration of various models, also introduced domain-focused abilities. For instance, it has a “Finance” mode that can fetch real-time stock quotes and financial data from an integrated provider. It also launched a Shopping hub that shows product cards and links when you ask about shopping or product comparisons. These are akin to vertical search integrations (backed by Amazon, etc.). So for tasks like “Compare the Nikon D3500 vs Canon EOS Rebel T7”, Perplexity might not only answer but also show product info and prices. ChatGPT would give a detailed comparison paragraph, but no live price unless using a plugin or search. Each platform is expanding features rapidly, but the key distinction is: ChatGPT is like an all-purpose assistant with a focus on generating and analyzing content, while Perplexity is like a research tool that is increasingly adding assistant-like capabilities.

In summary, ChatGPT is well-suited for creative work, in-depth explanations, coding and data analysis, and interactive conversations. Perplexity AI is best for search-oriented tasks: getting quick factual answers with sources, conducting research on a topic, comparing information from multiple references, and generating summaries of what’s on the web. There is overlap – e.g. both can summarize articles, translate text, do Q&A – and with recent updates they are learning each other’s tricks (ChatGPT now cites sources with Search, Perplexity can use advanced reasoning models for better answers). Power users might even use them in tandem: start with Perplexity to gather facts and sources, then feed those into ChatGPT to do something creative or analytical with them. Each service continues to add features (ChatGPT adding things like voice/video and agents, Perplexity adding shopping, internal file search, etc.), so their use cases keep expanding.

Pricing Models and Subscription Options

Both ChatGPT and Perplexity offer freemium models with an optional paid subscription, and each has introduced higher-tier plans for power users or enterprise teams. Below is a comparison of their pricing tiers and what they include:

Plan	ChatGPT (OpenAI)	Perplexity AI
Free Tier	ChatGPT Free – $0. Accessible via web or apps. Includes the basic GPT-4.1 mini model with limited use of advanced features. Free users get some access to GPT-4o (flagship model) with usage limits and can use real-time web search, file uploads, data analysis, image generation, and voice on a limited basis. When free limits are exhausted, it falls back to older GPT-3.5-level responses.	Perplexity Free – $0. Accessible on web and apps. Uses Perplexity’s default LLM (proprietary model) to answer queries with web search integration. Free users can ask unlimited standard questions and get cited answers. However, advanced models are mostly locked: free accounts are granted “5 Pro searches every 4 hours” for a taste of GPT-4/Claude, etc.. No access to certain Pro features like longer memory, internal file search, or Labs.
Standard Paid	ChatGPT Plus – $20/month. This subscription “levels up” the experience with more powerful models and fewer limits. Plus includes everything in Free, but with higher usage caps: faster and more frequent GPT-4o access (up to ~5× more messages than free), and priority access to new features. Notably, Plus unlocks GPT-4 (legacy) and GPT-4o models fully, as well as multimodal capabilities (vision and voice) and the ability to use multiple reasoning models (like OpenAI o3, o4-mini-high). Plus users also get access to the GPT-4.5 research preview (an even larger model) and GPT-4.1 (optimized for coding). Features like Advanced Data Analysis, image generation via DALL-E3, and the new ChatGPT agent (which can take actions) are available to Plus. In short, $20 gives full GPT-4-level AI power with relatively generous limits, similar to Perplexity’s offer.	Perplexity Pro – $20/month. Offers enhanced search and AI capabilities on par with ChatGPT Plus. Pro users can choose from multiple advanced models: GPT-4 (OpenAI), GPT-4o (OpenAI’s fast model), GPT-4o-mini, Anthropic’s Claude (3.5 or 4.0 versions), and Sonar Large (Perplexity’s 70B Llama-based model). The subscription allows a high number of “Pro searches” per day (hundreds), meaning you can ask more complex queries that utilize these models and get more detailed, source-rich answers. Pro also unlocks Pro Search mode (3× more web sources can be retrieved for a query) and Reasoning mode (access to specialized reasoning models like OpenAI o1/o3 and Claude “Thinking” mode). Additional perks: the ability to search your own uploaded files (PDFs, docs, etc.) alongside web content, image generation tools, voice input, and API access (including ~$5/month credit to use Perplexity’s API for Sonar model queries in your own apps).
Premium Power User	ChatGPT Pro – $200/month. This is OpenAI’s “hyper-premium” tier for unlimited usage and maximum capability. It includes everything in Plus, removes the usage caps on all models (so you can use GPT-4o or even the heavy reasoning models as much as you need, within fair use), and unlocks OpenAI o3-pro – the most powerful reasoning model, which “uses more compute for the best answers to the hardest questions”. Pro users also get extended voice/video features, priority access to new innovations, and an extended version of the ChatGPT agent that can perform complex tool usage or multi-turn tasks. Essentially, ChatGPT Pro is aimed at AI power-users or professionals who need the very highest limits and performance (comparable to what Max is for Perplexity).	Perplexity Max – $200/month. Introduced in July 2025, Max is Perplexity’s answer for power users. It grants unlimited access to “Labs” (so you can run as many complex multi-step AI workflows as you want), and first-in-line access to new features. Critically, Max subscribers get priority access to frontier models – for example, OpenAI’s o3-pro and Anthropic’s Claude 4.0 Opus (the latest, most advanced Claude model) are exclusive to Max currently. Max also promises early access to Perplexity’s upcoming innovations, like the Comet AI browser and other premium data sources. The idea is to cater to professionals who demand the very best models and unlimited usage. (OpenAI similarly was noted as first with a $200 plan.) Perplexity has even signaled an Enterprise Max in the future for organizations.
Team/Enterprise	ChatGPT Team – $25 per user/month (annual) or $30/user (monthly). This plan is for small teams and offers a shared secure workspace with admin controls. It includes all Plus features for each user (GPT-4o, advanced models) and allows connecting internal data sources (like Google Drive, SharePoint, GitHub, etc.) to ChatGPT so it can answer using private company content. Team plans come with data encryption, no training on your data by default, and compliance with privacy regulations. ChatGPT Enterprise – custom pricing (typically significantly more, depending on scale). It includes everything in Team, plus unlimited GPT-4o usage at higher speed, an expanded context window (for longer inputs), even deeper security (single sign-on, domain verification, enterprise-level encryption and analytics), and priority support with SLA. Enterprise offers tailored solutions, including data residency options and the ability to support unlimited users with volume discounts. In short, Enterprise is ChatGPT at scale with enhanced privacy and support, while Team is a smaller-scale business offering.	Perplexity Enterprise Pro – $40 per user/month (according to reports). This is analogous to ChatGPT Team/Enterprise combined at a smaller price point. Enterprise Pro allows an organization to have multiple users with admin and security features, and importantly it unlocks greater freedom in Pro usage (likely higher limits or no caps on the number of Pro searches). It also enables Internal Knowledge Search: the team can upload a larger set of internal documents (Enterprise users can index up to 500 files) to let Perplexity search within company data securely. Enterprise Pro would include all Pro model access (GPT-4, Claude, etc.) for each user. Perplexity is still expanding its enterprise features; SSO and other advanced security might be available or in development (the company has partnered with large firms like Airtel to roll out AI solutions). A higher-tier Enterprise Max (pricing not yet public) is planned, which would give organizations the unlimited Labs and top models of Max, combined with enterprise controls.

Both services therefore have a free option, a ~$20/mo pro option for advanced personal use, and a very high-end ~$200/mo tier for power users (just launched in 2025). For teams and companies, ChatGPT’s offerings are more mature (with defined Team and Enterprise plans and custom pricing), whereas Perplexity’s enterprise is simpler and cheaper per seat but perhaps with fewer enterprise-grade integrations at this time.

It’s worth noting that the $20/month price point gets you quite a lot in both cases – hence why both are priced equally. At $20, ChatGPT Plus and Perplexity Pro both grant access to GPT-4-class models and other premium features, effectively matching each other in value. The competition for “AI assistant at $20” is fierce, benefiting users. Meanwhile, the existence of $200 “Max/Pro” tiers shows there is demand from enthusiasts or professionals who are willing to pay for unlimited, cutting-edge AI access (and indeed, OpenAI and Perplexity aren’t alone – others like Anthropic and Google have introduced or are considering similar high-end plans).

Source Citation and Real-Time Browsing

One of the biggest differentiators historically was how each AI handles sources and up-to-date information. Perplexity AI was built around web browsing and citing sources from day one, whereas ChatGPT initially had a fixed knowledge base with no source attribution. However, as of 2024-2025, ChatGPT has integrated search and begun providing citations, so the gap has narrowed.

Perplexity AI: Every answer from Perplexity includes inline citations (e.g., footnote-style numbers that link to the source web pages). The system actively searches the web for each query, using search engines and scraping content to generate a synthesis. It then provides those reference links so you can “click through” and verify or read more. This design promotes transparency – the user can see where the information is coming from (news article, Wikipedia, academic paper, etc.). For instance, asking “What is the theory of cosmic inflation?” might yield an answer with citations like [1] (linking to a NASA page) and [2] (linking to a cosmology textbook site). This is invaluable for research or academic use, where you can directly reference the sources. Perplexity’s Pro search can pull in more sources (up to 20 sources, vs ~6 on default) to give an even broader basis for its answers. Perplexity also updates in real-time – it can retrieve current news, live sports scores, stock prices, and any information available on the open web. It essentially functions as a specialized browser: users have likened it to having “an AI Google” that not only finds information but explains it. Because of this, Perplexity’s answers tend to be grounded in verifiable facts, and the risk of hallucination is lower in factual queries (it usually won’t fabricate when it has search results to go on, though it might mis-summarize on rare occasions). One should note that if the web has incorrect info, Perplexity might propagate it – but the citation allows the user to judge the source quality.

ChatGPT: Originally (in 2022 and early 2023), ChatGPT would generate answers from its trained knowledge without citing any sources, and it had no live internet access. This meant it could only answer based on data up to a certain cutoff and had a tendency to invent references if asked for them, or state things confidently without a way to verify. OpenAI addressed these issues through a series of updates. By mid-2023, they introduced a (short-lived) Browsing beta for Plus users, which allowed GPT-4 to fetch web pages. That had limitations and was turned off for a while. Finally, in late 2024, OpenAI launched ChatGPT Search – a robust, integrated web browsing mode for ChatGPT that includes source citations. Now, ChatGPT can decide to perform a web search when a query looks like it needs fresh information. The user can also manually trigger a web search in the ChatGPT interface by clicking a “Search the web” button. The results are then used to craft an answer, and ChatGPT will provide linked references that you can expand in a sidebar. For example, if you ask “Who is the current CEO of Twitter?”, ChatGPT might search and then answer with a cited statement (source: a news article). An OpenAI announcement highlighted that “Chats now include links to sources… Click the Sources button to open a sidebar with references.”. This is very similar to how Perplexity and Bing Chat present sources. ChatGPT Search also features special data integrations for certain queries – they partnered with providers to show things like weather forecasts, stock charts, sports scores, and maps with up-to-date info in a visual format. Essentially, ChatGPT with search has become a direct competitor to Perplexity’s style of answer engine, delivering timely information plus citations, all within a conversational context. As of early 2025, this search feature was rolled out to all users (Plus, Enterprise, and Free) in supported regions.

Comparing the two: Today, both ChatGPT and Perplexity can retrieve real-time information and cite sources. Perplexity has a longer track record of doing this and might still have the edge in the user experience of search: it often shows multiple source snippets in the answer itself, whereas ChatGPT might synthesize more and require you to click the “Sources” sidebar to see the exact references. Perplexity sometimes presents answers in a nicely formatted way with bullet points or an “interactive element” (like an embedded weather graph or a YouTube video thumbnail if relevant). ChatGPT is getting there – its new search mode does incorporate images and structured data for certain categories – but a reviewer noted that ChatGPT’s attempt at a Perplexity-like experience is “still a little behind” in terms of the visual experience. Another difference: ChatGPT will sometimes mix its own knowledge with web data, giving more of a narrative answer augmented by sources, whereas Perplexity tends to strictly answer from the sources (it’s performing extractive summarization). If a source is wrong or the query is ambiguous, ChatGPT might apply more reasoning (thanks to the powerful model) to give the best answer, possibly even contradicting a poor source. Perplexity, meanwhile, might list what it found even if the info is debatable, relying on the user to judge the source. In terms of user control, Perplexity allows you to choose which model to answer with – e.g. you could use the “Grok 4” (xAI) model which might have a different web browsing approach, or Claude which might be more cautious – which can affect how the citations are used (some models might quote directly from sources, others summarize). ChatGPT doesn’t let you choose the web search model; it always uses its internal method with GPT-4/4o.

It’s also important to mention that ChatGPT can cite sources even without direct web browsing in some cases: for instance, if you provide it with a passage and ask “cite this”, or if it was trained on certain data with citations (though generally it wasn’t). However, those citations are not guaranteed to be real unless using the proper Search function or a plugin. Perplexity never fabricates a citation – the links are always to real web content it actually looked up.

Bottom line: If verifying information is crucial, both are now capable of giving you sources, but Perplexity was designed with a citation-first mindset and might give more granular sourcing. For real-time queries, both will access current data; ChatGPT uses Bing-like search and partnerships, while Perplexity uses its search index (possibly Bing API or its own crawler) to pull info. ChatGPT’s knowledge cutoff issues are largely solved by search, but if search is off, it might still be outdated. Perplexity by default is always up-to-date. One might say ChatGPT is an AI that can search, whereas Perplexity is search with an AI – converging abilities, but different starting points.

User Interface and Experience (UX/UI)

The user experience of ChatGPT vs Perplexity reflects their origins (chatbot vs search engine), though they have borrowed ideas from each other over time. Here’s a comparison of the interfaces and user experience features:

• Layout and Presentation: ChatGPT’s interface is a classic chat window. On the web, you have a sidebar with your conversation history and settings, and the main area where the conversation with the AI scrolls. It looks like a messaging app – each user prompt and AI response appear as chat bubbles (or blocks of text). Formatting is supported (the AI can produce markdown-formatted answers with bold, italics, code blocks, tables, etc.), but the content is predominantly text in a conversation flow. There are no default images or cards unless the AI explicitly outputs an image (in Plus, if asked) or a formatted table. Perplexity’s interface, on the other hand, feels more like a hybrid of a search results page and a Q&A forum. When you ask a question, you see an answer panel (often with bullet points or short paragraphs) that includes citation numbers inline. Below or beside it, you might see a list of sources or related queries. The design is clean and focused – it doesn’t show a continuous chat history on the side by default, though you can scroll up to see previous Q&A turns in the session. Perplexity may also highlight certain answers with visuals: for example, a query about weather or stocks might show a small chart or widget. It also often provides follow-up question suggestions (“People also asked”) to explore the topic further, whereas ChatGPT relies on the user to explicitly ask follow-ups.

• Conversation Management: ChatGPT offers robust conversation management. You can have multiple separate chats, each saved with a customizable title. This is great for organizing sessions by topic (one chat for work, one for a story you’re writing, etc.). You can revisit and continue those chats anytime, since ChatGPT retains the context of that conversation. It also provides controls like “Regenerate response” (to retry the answer), a stop generation button, and thumbs-up/down feedback buttons on each answer. Additionally, ChatGPT has theme settings (dark mode, etc.) and an option to disable chat history (for privacy) which then also prevents using your data for training. Perplexity’s sessions are more ephemeral: it does not save long-term chat history under user accounts in the same way. If you remain on the page, you can scroll up and see the previous questions in the thread and continue asking follow-ups that reference prior context. However, once you leave or reset, those Q&As are not saved under a history list. Perplexity’s focus is less on long threaded conversations and more on one-off Q&A that can branch into new searches. There is a feature called “Threads” in Perplexity’s UI (it lets you branch a follow-up into a new topic) and the ability to share or export an answer to “Pages”. But you won’t find a list of all your past chats in the sidebar as with ChatGPT. This means ChatGPT currently offers a better experience for an ongoing, evolving discussion or project with the AI, since you can pick up where you left off easily.

• User-Focused Results and Interactivity: Perplexity’s answers are often augmented with interactive elements. For example, as noted earlier, a weather query produced an interactive weather chart embedded below the text. It may show images (with source links) or YouTube video results if relevant to the query. The inclusion of these elements can make the results more engaging and immediately useful. ChatGPT historically would only output text unless specifically asked to produce an image or specific format. With the new Search mode, ChatGPT’s UI is starting to include some rich content (like tabs for Weather, Stocks, etc., and maps), but it’s still rolling out and not as pervasive for all answers. Also, in ChatGPT you often have to ask for something explicitly – e.g. “Show me an example code” – whereas Perplexity by design shows sources without being asked, and might show related info by default. Both UIs are ad-free and minimalist, which is a huge plus compared to traditional search engines. There are no distractions outside of the AI’s output and necessary controls.

• Settings and Customization: ChatGPT allows some customization via its custom instructions (you can set a persistent instruction like “Respond in a formal tone” which applies to all chats) – this is a personalization feature. It also has options to turn on/off certain beta features like plugins or developer mode (for example, enabling function calling). Perplexity doesn’t have an equivalent to custom system instructions; however, it does let you toggle which model to use and which search mode (fast “Best” mode vs thorough “Pro” vs deep “Research” mode). That is a form of customization: if you want a quick answer you use Best (it picks a model for you), if you want maximum detail you use Research (it might run multiple searches and use more than one model to compile a long answer). This is a bit complex for casual users, but power users enjoy the control. ChatGPT’s model selection is simpler in the UI (free vs GPT-4, or o1 preview etc. from a dropdown), but you don’t switch it per question dynamically – it’s usually per conversation. Perplexity lets model-switch per query.

• Mobile and Apps UX: On mobile, ChatGPT’s official app has a slick interface with a few extra features like speech input and output (a microphone button and a headphone icon to talk/listen) and even the ability to show images or take photos to send to ChatGPT (on iOS). It’s essentially the same chat experience, optimized for small screens, with the bonus of voice conversation that’s very seamless (one tap to start talking). Perplexity’s mobile app includes a microphone for voice queries as well, and integrates the Perplexity Assistant – which can interface with your phone’s other apps. For example, you could ask the Perplexity mobile app to “Find me an Italian restaurant nearby and book a table,” and it could theoretically use map data or even perform actions through integrations (the Assistant can maintain context across apps, set calendar events, etc., as per their description). This is a more agentive mobile experience, whereas ChatGPT’s app stays within its own environment (though ChatGPT’s “agent” can use tools like browsing and code, it doesn’t directly control your phone apps). So, on UX: ChatGPT mobile is great for conversation, translating speech, and general Q&A, and Perplexity mobile is aiming to be an AI concierge for your smartphone – an interesting distinction.

• Community & Sharing: ChatGPT recently introduced the GPTs/Store where users can create and share custom chatbots with specific skills or personas. This adds a community element where you can browse and use GPTs made by others (for cooking recipes, for language learning, etc.). Perplexity has the Discover section where you can see popular “Spaces” (pages of content) or interesting answers others have chosen to share. For instance, someone might share a curated Q&A on “Climate Change Facts – sources included” as a page. You can also share a link to a Perplexity answer easily so others can see the question and the AI’s cited answer. ChatGPT allows sharing a chat via link too, but it’s less prominent. These features don’t directly affect UI quality, but they enhance the user experience by enabling knowledge exchange and showcasing what the AI can do.

Overall UI/UX verdict: Both platforms have clean, user-friendly interfaces with no ads. ChatGPT feels like using a very smart chatbot – excellent for interactive dialogue, with features supporting conversation management (history, editing messages in some apps, voice chat, etc.). Perplexity feels like using a smart search engine – streamlined to give you what you need (answers with sources) and then perhaps move on to the next query. One source summarized that “both have simple UIs… ChatGPT displays info in text conversation form… Perplexity’s answers come with interactive elements, sources, relevant images, and videos”, highlighting that Perplexity’s UI is more results-oriented. Users who want a more visual and reference-focused answer might prefer Perplexity’s presentation, while those who want a continuous conversation will prefer ChatGPT’s. Notably, ChatGPT is catching up by adding source citations and some visuals, and Perplexity is improving conversational aspects – but their UX philosophies still differ. Finally, on specific user feedback: ChatGPT’s voice feature has been praised as life-changing for translation on the go, and Perplexity’s focus mode (allowing requirement-focused Q&A) has been appreciated by users who want concise answers. It often comes down to user intent which interface feels better.

Language Support and Localization

Both ChatGPT and Perplexity AI are capable of understanding and generating multiple languages, but there are differences in their language coverage and localization of the interface.

ChatGPT: OpenAI’s models are trained on data from many languages, and GPT-4 in particular demonstrated strong multilingual abilities. According to OpenAI, GPT-4 can handle dozens of languages with high proficiency – it scored very well on academic exams translated into languages like Spanish, French, German, Mandarin, etc., often out-performing previous generation models. In terms of user interface and official support, by mid-2024 ChatGPT expanded to support over 50 languages for the UI and user settings. This means the chat interface, prompts, and even things like the help center are available in those languages (e.g., a user could use the ChatGPT app in Spanish or Japanese). As of the GPT-4o launch, OpenAI explicitly said ChatGPT now supports more than 50 languages for the interface to make it accessible worldwide. In practice, users can input in virtually any major language and ChatGPT will respond in that language. It can also translate between languages. Moreover, the voice feature added another layer: you can speak in various languages and ChatGPT’s speech recognition (Whisper technology) will transcribe it, then it can respond (and even speak back) in the target language. Anecdotally, ChatGPT’s voice output is available for a handful of languages (it can speak in different voices/accents for English, and possibly a few other languages – OpenAI showcased a female Spanish voice, an American English voice, etc.). So ChatGPT is a very multilingual assistant – you can have a conversation in Arabic or ask it to write a poem in Swahili, and it will do a decent job.

One user experience example: a traveler used ChatGPT’s voice translation mode in a hospital where nobody spoke English, and it successfully acted as a live translator, impressing the user and highlighting the robustness of its multilingual conversation ability. This indicates not just static language knowledge, but real-time translation and dialogue management in foreign languages.

Perplexity AI: Perplexity’s underlying capability in languages depends on the models it uses. Its default model “Perplexity (Sonar)” is based on Llama, which is trained on multiple languages but might be more English-centric (Llama 2, for instance, has decent but not GPT-4-level performance in languages like Spanish, French, etc.). However, Perplexity Pro allows the use of models like Claude and GPT-4, which are very strong in languages, and it even offers Claude 4.0 Sonnet and Opus, which presumably have wide language support (Anthropic’s Claude is known to handle many languages as well). The OpenAI GPT-4o model in Perplexity also is multilingual by design. So, if a Pro user selects GPT-4 or Best mode, Perplexity will likely understand and answer in the input language with high quality. The free version using the default model might struggle more with less common languages or right-to-left scripts, etc., though it should manage popular languages to an extent.

On the user interface side, Perplexity’s site and app are localized in multiple languages. The help center menu shows options like Portuguese, French, German, Japanese, Korean, Spanish, etc., implying the UI can be switched to those. The company also announced the assistant is “available on Android and iOS devices, integrated into the app, in 15 languages including English, Spanish, French, German, Japanese, Polish, Korean, and Hindi”. This suggests that the Perplexity Assistant (the mobile feature) was intentionally made multilingual from the start for those 15 languages. Likely, if you speak a question in any of those languages, it will search local sources if available and answer in that language. Perplexity also likely uses the browser’s locale or the query language to decide which web search domain to use (e.g., if you ask in German, it might pull results from German websites or Wikipedia DE).

One limitation observed: A reviewer comparing translation tasks found that ChatGPT produced more personalized, context-aware translations, whereas “Perplexity gave a total of 16 basic words and their translations… not as personalized as ChatGPT”. This was referring to an experiment where each was asked to translate some content or provide basic phrases. ChatGPT, with its conversational flair, may provide usage notes or a more nuanced translation, while Perplexity might just list translations possibly directly from a source or dictionary. Also, the same reviewer noted ChatGPT’s voice mode was superior for active voice interaction and translation, while Perplexity’s voice mode, though present, wasn’t as advanced in that context.

In terms of less widely spoken languages or code-mixed queries, ChatGPT’s larger training might give it the edge. However, for many mainstream languages, both should work. If one uses Perplexity with GPT-4 model selected, the output will be nearly as good as ChatGPT GPT-4 in that language (since it’s essentially using the same model). The difference is if the query involves web search, Perplexity will retrieve sources possibly in that language. ChatGPT’s web search might bias to English sources unless the question is clearly region/language-specific.

Another point: Localization of content. ChatGPT will often default to English if the question is in English, but you can ask it to answer in another language. Perplexity will likely answer in the language you asked (if you query in Spanish, it answers in Spanish). Each can also output multiple languages in one answer if needed (like compare a phrase in French and Chinese, etc.).

Summary: ChatGPT has a very broad and well-tested multilingual capability, making it a strong choice for non-English users or those needing translation. OpenAI has explicitly made it accessible globally by localizing the interface into dozens of languages. Perplexity supports multiple languages too, especially major ones, and has localized apps in at least 15 languages. It might not cover quite as many languages in the UI as ChatGPT does, but it covers the key ones and the underlying models ensure it can respond in a range of languages. One potential advantage of Perplexity: because it cites sources, a user could get answers with references from non-English websites – useful for local news or region-specific info. Meanwhile, ChatGPT’s base knowledge might be skewed toward English content (though GPT-4 was trained on translated data too). In practice, both can be used as multilingual assistants, but ChatGPT provides a more natural and context-aware experience in various languages (with rich answers, cultural nuance, and even voice output), whereas Perplexity provides factual answers in the queried language with source transparency, which could be great for bilingual fact-finding.

API Availability and Developer Capabilities

For developers or power users who want to integrate these AI services into other applications or workflows, the availability of APIs and tools is an important factor.

ChatGPT / OpenAI API: OpenAI offers a comprehensive API platform for its underlying models (though not an API for the ChatGPT website interface itself, the API allows you to use the same models that ChatGPT uses). This includes the GPT-3.5 family, GPT-4, and newer releases (OpenAI has been gradually adding models like the o-series to the API as well). For instance, OpenAI announced that OpenAI o3 and o3-pro are available in the API as of June 2025, meaning developers can programmatically use the advanced reasoning model outside of the ChatGPT UI. The API uses a RESTful JSON interface with the “chat completions” format, which enables multi-turn conversations and function calling. Developers worldwide use these APIs to build custom chatbots, integrate AI into their products, or automate tasks. This is essentially the same technology behind ChatGPT, but accessible for custom applications.

OpenAI’s API is well-documented and comes with usage-based pricing (e.g., per 1K tokens). It doesn’t include web browsing by default; developers have to handle any tool usage (though the models can be instructed to call external tools via function calling). However, the function calling feature introduced in 2023 lets the model output a structured format that can trigger external APIs, making it easier to create plugin-like functionality in custom apps. For example, a developer can give GPT the ability to query a weather API or database by providing a function definition.

In addition to the core model API, OpenAI provides tools like Whisper API for speech-to-text (which is used in ChatGPT’s voice input) and will likely provide access to image analysis or generation endpoints (they already have the DALL-E image generation API, which ChatGPT uses under the hood for image requests). There’s also an ecosystem of ChatGPT Plugins – these were initially only in the ChatGPT UI, but now with function calling, similar integrations can be built by third parties outside the UI. So, developers have a lot of scope with OpenAI: either use the raw model to replicate ChatGPT-like capabilities or use specialized endpoints.

Perplexity API: Perplexity AI has a less publicized API, but it does exist. The Pro subscription includes “API credit” – specifically “$5 monthly to use on Sonar (the Perplexity model) via our API”. This indicates that Perplexity offers an API where developers can send queries to the Perplexity service and get back answers (likely with sources). The mention of Sonar suggests the API might primarily allow access to Perplexity’s own Llama-based models with the search capability. Possibly, they expose endpoints to do what the UI does: input a question and get an answer + citations JSON. This could be very useful for adding a QA search feature to an app or website. It’s not as broadly advertised or documented for non-subscribers as OpenAI’s API is, and the fact that they give a fixed credit implies it’s not yet a usage-based open-ended billing (they might limit it to pro users as a perk). However, the presence of an “Enterprise Pro” page and an “API” link in their help center suggests that larger customers can get more extensive API access or even on-prem solutions. For example, an enterprise might integrate Perplexity into their internal knowledge base via API – feeding queries and getting answers that combine internal docs and web data.

Perplexity’s API likely allows searching internal files too if you have them indexed (since Enterprise users can upload files, perhaps there’s an API to query that index). This is somewhat analogous to OpenAI’s approach of offering connectors for enterprise; Perplexity just offloads it to their service.

One key difference: OpenAI’s API gives raw model output which may not cite sources or do web search unless you implement it, whereas Perplexity’s API presumably gives you a ready-made answer engine output with sources. It’s more of a specialized API (QA with retrieval) than a general language model API. If a developer specifically wants to incorporate cited answer generation from web content, using Perplexity’s API could save a lot of work (instead of building their own retrieval-augmented GPT pipeline).

Community and Tools: OpenAI has a huge developer community, lots of third-party libraries, and integration in frameworks. Perplexity’s developer ecosystem is much smaller in comparison (as it is not primarily an API company, but a product). However, we might see it grow if they open up the API more widely.

API Pricing: For OpenAI, developers pay per usage (for example, GPT-4 is priced per 1K tokens, which can get expensive but manageable; GPT-3.5 is cheaper, etc.). For Perplexity, since the API isn’t sold standalone, the cost is essentially the subscription. They might eventually have separate enterprise API pricing if offering large-scale access.

Availability: OpenAI’s services are cloud-hosted on Azure/AWS and are globally accessible (with some region restrictions). Perplexity’s API is also cloud-based (likely on their servers using a mix of model APIs and their own infra). Neither offers an on-premise or offline version of their main models (OpenAI does not let you download GPT-4, and Perplexity’s Sonar isn’t downloadable either). So both APIs require internet and come with data usage agreements.

AutoGPT/Agents: It’s worth noting that OpenAI’s ecosystem spawned things like AutoGPT, where developers chain calls to create agent systems. Now, ChatGPT itself is getting agent abilities. For developers wanting to build agents, OpenAI’s tools (function calling, etc.) are quite powerful. Perplexity’s Labs is an internal agent feature but not something you can directly program – you can use their Labs interface but not programmatically instruct it as a developer. So in terms of building custom AI-powered applications, OpenAI’s platform is far more mature and flexible.

Conclusion on API: If you are a developer, OpenAI’s API (ChatGPT models) gives you full control to utilize the intelligence of ChatGPT in your own app. Perplexity’s API gives you a more targeted service (QA with retrieval), which could be extremely useful for certain applications like a QA chatbot on a website that always cites sources. For broader or creative applications, OpenAI’s direct model access is preferable. Both ChatGPT and Perplexity also have browser extensions (OpenAI’s official extension ties into ChatGPT Search, and Perplexity has a Chrome extension that lets you ask it questions from any page or use it as your default search). These are user tools rather than developer APIs, but they indicate the integration possibilities.

In summary, OpenAI provides API and developer tools as a core part of its offering, whereas Perplexity’s developer offerings are emerging and mostly tied to its Pro subscription and enterprise deals. A developer might use OpenAI’s API to embed a model and if they need retrieval with sources, either implement their own using something like OpenAI + a vector database, or call Perplexity’s API for a quick solution.

Transparency of Models and Technology

Transparency can refer to how openly each service shares information about its underlying models (architecture, training data, etc.) and how clear they are about which model is being used for a given query.

ChatGPT / OpenAI: OpenAI has traditionally been guarded about the internals of its models. For example, with GPT-4 they did not disclose model size or architecture details, citing competitive and safety concerns. So in terms of technical transparency (like how the model was trained, on exactly what data), OpenAI is not very open. However, they do provide clear model identities/names and release notes. In the ChatGPT interface, if you’re a Plus user, you can see exactly which model you are using: GPT-3.5, GPT-4, GPT-4o, o1-preview, etc., and these correlate with official model descriptions. OpenAI publishes blogs and docs about these models. For instance, they introduced GPT-4o (Omni) in May 2024 and described it as multimodal with GPT-4-level intelligence. They also have a Wikipedia entry which summarizes that GPT-4o was released May 13, 2024 as a multimodal GPT model supporting text, image, and audio inputs/outputs. The ChatGPT UI now even labels “GPT-4.5 (preview)” or “o3-pro” when those are in use, so users know they are using the newest model.

OpenAI is also somewhat transparent about model improvements and limitations: they publish technical reports (like the GPT-4 system card) and note things like “GPT-4.1 is optimized for coding, GPT-4o is faster but equivalent to GPT-4”, etc. They enumerated the different models in a recent comparison: GPT-4 (legacy), GPT-4o, GPT-4o-mini, OpenAI o1, o1-mini, etc., and their intended purposes. So from a user perspective, ChatGPT is quite clear on which model you’re using and when a new one comes out. They also give approximate release timelines in public: e.g., GPT-4o initial release May 2024, GPT-4o-mini replacing 3.5 in July 2024, GPT-4 image generation in Mar 2025, o1 preview in late 2024, o3 in April 2025, etc. The “transparency” about model identity is good, but transparency about how it works internally is minimal (we don’t know neuron counts or training steps).

Perplexity AI: Perplexity has been relatively open about the mix of models it uses. According to their documentation and announcements, the company leverages a “proprietary layer” on top of several foundation models. They have named these models in various places. For instance, the Perplexity Pro help article explicitly lists “Sonar (in-house model built on Llama 3.1 70B)”, “R1 1776 (Perplexity’s fine-tuned ‘uncensored’ model based on DeepSeek-R1)”, as well as external models GPT-4.1, Claude 4.0, Grok 4, Gemini 2.5 Pro, etc., that are available via their service. This level of transparency is quite high: they’re telling users we use a Llama-based model we trained in-house and even giving it a codename (Sonar), and acknowledging using others like OpenAI and Anthropic models. They also share tidbits like GPT-4.1 (presumably an updated GPT-4 from OpenAI) being part of the lineup, and that Sonar is tuned for search integration. They mention Gemini 2.5 Pro (Google’s latest model introduced March 2025), suggesting they might have access to Google’s Gemini (likely via an API partnership or early access) – this is notable, as it shows Perplexity’s strategy of using “the best model for the task” regardless of provider. So Perplexity is transparent in the sense of model sourcing – users can even manually pick which model to use for a given query if they want to see differences.

As for underlying architecture transparency: since many of the models Perplexity uses are third-party (OpenAI, Anthropic, etc.), those come with whatever transparency those companies provide (which is limited, as noted). Perplexity’s own models (Sonar, R1) – they did at least tell us the base (Llama v3.3 or 3.1, etc.) and the intention (R1 aimed at uncensored factual output). But they haven’t open-sourced these models or published detailed papers on them. So neither ChatGPT nor Perplexity is fully open source or fully transparent about training data (both are actually facing or likely to face questions about copyrighted data in training – indeed Perplexity is already in legal hot water for content scraping).

Model release transparency: Both have been actively updating users on new model releases. OpenAI via its blog/news (GPT-4o, o1, o3, etc. had announcements; even the pricing page lists GPT-4.5 as a preview). Perplexity via its blog/twitter (the CEO Aravind Srinivas tweeted when o1 became available on Perplexity, albeit noting it was slow, which is a transparent communication of performance). Also, Perplexity’s Wikipedia lists a timeline of what models got added (Claude 4, Grok, Gemini etc.).

Architecture and Safety transparency: OpenAI provides model “system cards” discussing biases, safety evaluations, etc., which is a form of transparency about model behavior (though not architecture). Perplexity doesn’t have published system cards, but it being an aggregator means it inherits some model behavior from the models it uses. One notable thing: Perplexity explicitly offers an “uncensored” model (R1) for certain queries, which is a transparent (even if controversial) choice to trade-off strict filtering for openness on sensitive topics. They likely do that to avoid the model refusing to answer certain political or health questions – whereas ChatGPT would often give a safe/compliant answer or a refusal, Perplexity’s R1 might just give the information directly. This speaks to transparency of philosophy: ChatGPT is very aligned with a safety policy, sometimes at the cost of withholding information, and it’s explicit about having those rules (OpenAI posts its usage policies publicly). Perplexity, while it surely has some content guidelines, appears to position itself as “just giving you what the sources say” and even enabling less filtered output via R1. It’s a different approach to transparency about information.

Model identification: In ChatGPT’s interface, you can always see which engine (3.5 vs 4 vs etc.) at the top of the chat. In Perplexity’s interface, if you use Pro, you can see a small label of which model answered (and you can change it). So both are clear to the user on what’s running.

One could say Perplexity is more transparent about being a composite AI (since they openly admit using multiple companies’ models and an ensemble of tools), whereas ChatGPT is transparent that it’s using “OpenAI models” but doesn’t detail those beyond names and broad capabilities. Neither reveals the “source code” or training sets of their models.

Transparency of updates: Both services frequently announce new features. For example, ChatGPT announced its “Canvas mode, DALL-E 3 integration, voice mode, SearchGPT, etc.” in updates, and Perplexity announced things like “voice mode, interactive prompt results, ability to shop from results, etc.”. This helps users understand what’s new and what technology might be behind it (e.g., DALL-E 3 for images, which is an underlying model openly credited by OpenAI).

Model Name and Origin Clarity: The question specifically mentions transparency of underlying models (model names, release dates, architecture transparency). We’ve covered names and releases. Architecture transparency is low for both (neither says “we use a 175B parameter Transformer with X layers”). Model names: ChatGPT’s notable ones are GPT-4 (Mar 2023), GPT-4 Turbo (some variant), GPT-4o (May 2024), GPT-4o mini (July 2024), OpenAI o1 (Nov 2024 preview), o3 (Apr 2025), GPT-4.5 (preview mid-2025). Perplexity’s are Sonar (possibly introduced around late 2023 when Llama 2 came out, and maybe updated with Llama 3.3 if that exists internally), R1 1776 (the name suggests maybe launched around July 4, 2023? Wild guess from 1776 theme), plus they integrated GPT-4 on day one of GPT-4’s availability (after March 2023) and kept adding new ones (Claude 2 in mid-2023, etc., Claude 4 presumably refers to an Anthropic model beyond Claude 2, maybe an internal name).

Final note: The user of these services can generally find out what model produced a given answer (especially on Perplexity Pro or ChatGPT Plus). That’s good for transparency. If one cares about things like bias or style differences, they can switch models in Perplexity or note differences between ChatGPT’s modes. Neither service, however, can fully explain how a particular answer was derived (they are black boxes in that sense, aside from providing sources for factual data in Perplexity’s case).

So, in terms of transparency: Perplexity is up-front about using a mix of AI models (OpenAI, Anthropic, etc.) and even naming them to users, while OpenAI is transparent about its own model versions but not about anything beyond that (and certainly not about using others’ models, which it doesn’t – it uses its own). Both are proprietary services with limited insight into model internals for the public.

Safety Features and Moderation Tools

Safety and moderation are critical aspects, as these AI systems must handle potentially harmful or sensitive content. ChatGPT and Perplexity have somewhat different approaches due to their nature.

ChatGPT (OpenAI) Safety: OpenAI has well-defined usage policies for ChatGPT (disallowing hate speech, explicit sexual content, instructions for violence/illicit behavior, etc.) and they have built multiple layers of safety into the system. At the model level, ChatGPT underwent Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF) where human reviewers taught it to refuse or safely respond to disallowed queries. So if a user asks something against policy (e.g. “How do I make a bomb?”), ChatGPT is likely to refuse with a polite warning. OpenAI also employs an automated moderation API that checks user inputs and ChatGPT’s outputs for policy violations; if triggered, it may block the response or flag the conversation. They’ve even started using GPT-4 itself to moderate (as of mid-2023, OpenAI mentioned using GPT-4 to help with content moderation decisions by classifying content) – an application of the model to improve consistency of moderation. For users, this often means ChatGPT might respond with “I’m sorry, I cannot assist with that request.” for certain queries, or it will give a very generic safe answer (e.g., if asked medical advice, it often includes a disclaimer “I’m not a medical professional…”). On the transparency side of safety, ChatGPT does not generally reveal its entire chain-of-thought or the exact reason it refused (beyond referencing policy), but OpenAI’s policies are public so users can understand the boundaries.

OpenAI also provides some user controls related to safety: you can turn off chat history which also means OpenAI won’t use your data to further train models – a privacy safeguard. ChatGPT Enterprise goes further by guaranteeing no training on your prompts and offering data retention controls. There’s also the ability to report problematic answers via the feedback buttons. And for developers using the API, OpenAI provides the moderation endpoint and requires developers to comply with similar content rules.

Perplexity AI Safety: Perplexity, by design, relies on pulling information from the web. Therefore, one aspect of its safety is that it won’t typically generate completely novel inappropriate content out of thin air – it’s constrained (mostly) to what exists on reputable sites (which its search algorithms surface). However, this doesn’t guarantee safety: the web has lots of biased or harmful content. Perplexity likely filters out certain results and has safe-search settings for things like pornographic content. It probably avoids showing content from extremist sites by relying on mainstream search rankings. If a user explicitly asks for something disallowed, how does Perplexity respond? There isn’t an abundance of documentation, but given they are a company, they likely also trained their models with some moderation guidelines. The interesting twist is their R1 1776 model, described as “uncensored, unbiased, and factual, especially on topics subject to censorship”. This suggests that Perplexity noticed that models like ChatGPT (or even Claude) might refuse or give watered-down answers on certain politically sensitive topics, and they wanted a model that will just present information straightforwardly. For example, if asked about a controversial political issue, R1 might just list factual points from both sides without the model’s own bias or refusal – or it might provide info even if one side is considered extreme, as long as it’s factual. This could be seen as a commitment to avoiding undue censorship, but it’s a double-edged sword because “uncensored” might produce offensive content if not careful. Likely R1 still follows basic rules (no illegal instructions, etc.), but maybe it’s less filtered on political speech.

Perplexity being an answer engine also means it doesn’t typically output long opinionated essays – it sticks to factual tone, which might reduce the chance of generating something harmful from it. It cites sources, so in a way, it deflects some responsibility by saying “according to this source, X”. If the query is something like self-harm or medical emergency, I’m not sure how Perplexity handles it. It might give a factual description and perhaps a suggestion to seek help (maybe coming from a source like a health site). ChatGPT in such cases usually gives a compassionate caution and a suggestion to seek professional help.

On user controls, Perplexity doesn’t have as many settings exposed. There’s no “turn off AI safety” toggle or anything (nor does ChatGPT). If Perplexity’s model encounters a completely disallowed request, it might simply not return an answer or apologize. The difference is, because it relies on search, it might just say “I can’t find anything on that” rather than a moral stance.

Moderation Tools for Enterprise: ChatGPT Enterprise offers admin dashboards where companies can monitor usage and ensure no sensitive data is leaked or misused. They also likely allow opting out of certain features for compliance. We don’t have evidence of Perplexity offering such detailed admin moderation tools yet, but presumably Enterprise Pro would allow some oversight of queries made by employees (especially if using internal files, etc.).

Privacy: Safety also extends to privacy. OpenAI has taken steps to ensure enterprise data is secure (no training on it, encryption, compliance). Perplexity presumably does similar for Enterprise (keeping internal searches private, data not used elsewhere).

Public Accountability: Both have had or might have controversies. ChatGPT had well-documented instances of jailbreaking (users finding ways to make it produce disallowed content via clever prompts). OpenAI continuously patches these exploits. Perplexity, since it can search the web, could potentially surface copyrighted text or problematic content unless it’s careful. Indeed, it is facing legal challenges from major media for allegedly using their content without permission to train or provide answers. This is more about intellectual property safety than user safety, but it’s a factor: ChatGPT also was trained on lots of data but OpenAI is now making deals with publishers for their Search feature, whereas Perplexity’s scrappy usage of web data is being challenged. Over time, both might have to adjust to copyright – maybe citing sources and sharing revenue (Perplexity started a publishers’ program in 2024 to share ad revenue).

Toxicity and Bias: Both systems have to handle biased or hateful content. ChatGPT tries to refuse or respond with neutralizing statements if user input is hateful or if a source it knows is hateful, it won’t replicate slurs unless quoting and explaining. Perplexity might just quote from a source if it’s factual – hopefully it avoids fringe sources that are overtly hateful. The R1 model being “unbiased” might mean it doesn’t take a political stance but just gives info. It likely still avoids slurs or harassment.

Moderation in multi-model context: If a user on Perplexity picks, say, Claude model, Anthropics’ safety rules apply (Claude is known to be quite cautious). If they pick OpenAI GPT-4 via Perplexity, OpenAI’s moderation should apply as well (OpenAI does enforce policy even on API usage to some extent). If they pick Sonar or R1 (Perplexity’s own), then Perplexity’s own moderation is in play.

User Perspective: For a casual user, ChatGPT might sometimes feel frustrating if it refuses something or gives a lecture on ethics – but it’s generally safe and won’t show you graphic or disturbing content without warning. Perplexity will generally give you factual info and likely less hand-holding. If you tried to use them to get illicit instructions, ideally both will not comply. If you ask a politically charged question, ChatGPT might try to be very balanced or say it can’t take sides; Perplexity might just show what different sources say.

To give a concrete example: Medical advice. ChatGPT typically provides some general advice and a disclaimer, “I am not a doctor, but… here is some information and please consult a professional.” Perplexity might search up WebMD and give you an answer referencing it. That could actually be more directly useful and also transparent (source given), but it doesn’t explicitly say “talk to a doctor” unless the source said so. So, ChatGPT has more of a caretaker approach due to its training, whereas Perplexity is tool-like – giving info and leaving the judgement to you (with the exception that its default model likely won’t do something clearly dangerous like encourage self-harm).

Safety Conclusion: ChatGPT employs strict moderation and alignment techniques to minimize harmful outputs. It is somewhat constrained but much safer out-of-the-box for broad audiences; OpenAI invests heavily in these guardrails (and advertises it as a feature, especially for enterprise – data privacy, content filters, etc.). Perplexity leans on the principle of providing information with transparency; it has safety measures but also features like an uncensored model that indicate a willingness to let users access sensitive info (with sources) rather than block it. This could be seen as less paternalistic but potentially riskier. Enterprises concerned about AI saying something rogue might prefer ChatGPT’s approach, whereas researchers wanting uncensored data might appreciate Perplexity’s. Both will likely continue refining moderation – especially as legal and ethical standards evolve.

Offline or App Capabilities

By nature, both ChatGPT and Perplexity are cloud-based AI services that require an internet connection to function (since the AI models run on servers). There is no true offline mode for either – you cannot download ChatGPT or Perplexity’s brain to run on your local device (the models are far too large and proprietary). However, we can discuss the app availability and any partial offline features:

ChatGPT Apps: OpenAI has official apps for iOS and Android, providing the ChatGPT experience on mobile. These apps still require internet because they call OpenAI’s servers for responses. They do cache your conversation history locally for convenience, but the AI processing isn’t on-device. In addition, OpenAI released a ChatGPT desktop app for macOS in 2024. The Mac app adds a quick access global shortcut and integrates things like screenshot sharing to ChatGPT. It’s basically a web wrapper with some OS integration. There isn’t an official Windows app yet, but Windows users can just use the web or maybe an Edge sidebar integration. Also interestingly, ChatGPT became accessible via other channels: as of late 2024, OpenAI enabled ChatGPT via phone calls and WhatsApp in some regions. That means a user can call a number and talk to ChatGPT with voice, or message a WhatsApp bot. This is more about multi-channel access rather than offline though – it still hits the server, but it’s notable that ChatGPT expanded beyond just the web UI.

Perplexity Apps: Perplexity offers a mobile app for iOS and Android as well, and apparently a macOS app too (the DemandSage source mentioned macOS). The mobile app includes the Perplexity Assistant which can interact with other apps as mentioned. There’s also a Chrome extension for Perplexity, which can replace your default search or let you query Perplexity easily while browsing. None of these mean offline either – they all call out to the internet to do the searches and AI processing.

Offline use: If you have no internet, neither ChatGPT nor Perplexity can answer new questions. ChatGPT’s app might let you read the cached past answers offline, but you can’t ask new things. Perplexity’s app likely is similar. There are some AI models that run locally on devices (smaller LLaMA variants), but those are separate from these services.

Data Download: One angle – ChatGPT does allow you to export your chat history (in JSON or HTML), so you can have a local copy of your past conversations if needed. Perplexity pages can be exported or copy-pasted as well. But that’s just exporting text, not the AI itself.

Hardware Integration: ChatGPT via the API can be integrated into things like IoT devices if you have internet connectivity. For example, someone could build a Raspberry Pi voice assistant using the ChatGPT API. That’s not offline, but it’s an app/systems integration. Perplexity’s API similarly could be used if someone wanted a device that answers questions with sources.

Edge cases: ChatGPT does not run in web browsers offline obviously, but something like Bing Chat does have a bit of offline knowledge via the browser’s index for recent queries. Perplexity does not have any offline knowledge base; it always needs to search or use the model’s memory which is on server.

Speed on mobile: Because they require internet, sometimes users may wonder if either caches results. Perplexity might cache certain popular queries so that it can answer faster (just speculation, some search engines do caching). ChatGPT does not cache at edge; each request goes to the model. If one were on a slow or metered connection, ChatGPT might use a lot of data for large answers (since it streams tokens). Perplexity might use a bit less data since the answers are usually shorter (and it’s not streaming token by token in the UI; it typically presents a full answer after a short wait).

In summary: Both ChatGPT and Perplexity require online access – neither offers an offline model download or local processing option. For app capabilities, ChatGPT has a slight edge in that it’s integrated with phone/voice systems (call/WhatsApp) and has a very refined mobile app with voice chat. Perplexity’s app is powerful too, with voice and an assistant that can do tasks on your device (like a smart assistant). If one were looking for using AI in areas with limited internet, neither is ideal (maybe a smaller offline model would be needed). But if “offline” in the question meant “outside a web browser,” then yes, both have multiple platform apps.

One more aspect: Platform support – ChatGPT can be accessed on web, iOS, Android, Mac (officially). Unofficially, you can use it on Linux via the web or command-line via API. Perplexity accessible on web, iOS, Android, Mac. Both likely have similar coverage.

To the user, this category might be about whether one can use these on mobile or if there’s any offline workaround. The answer: Both have excellent mobile apps, neither works truly offline.

Enterprise and Developer Tooling Support

We touched on APIs earlier for developers, but here we consider the broader suite of support for enterprise integration and developer tooling beyond just the API itself.

ChatGPT for Enterprise/Business: OpenAI has clearly differentiated offerings for enterprise. ChatGPT Enterprise provides enterprise-grade security (SOC 2 compliance, encryption), privacy (no data is used for training, options for data retention), and IT integration (Single Sign-On with SAML, domain-level admin controls, user management). They also offer analytics dashboards for usage within the company and the ability to manage how employees use ChatGPT. For example, an admin can see which team members are using it and how often, ensure compliance with company policies, etc.. They even mention data residency in multiple regions for enterprise, meaning the ability to host the service in a specific geography to comply with data laws.

Additionally, ChatGPT Enterprise (and Team) includes connectors to internal data sources. This is a big feature: it allows the AI to retrieve information from a company’s private knowledge base (Google Drive documents, SharePoint files, Confluence pages, GitHub repos, etc.) when answering employees. It’s akin to having a company’s own content incorporated into ChatGPT’s knowledge via retrieval, but done securely. This turns ChatGPT into a powerful internal assistant that can answer “Where is our vacation policy document?” or “Summarize the latest sales report” if those sources are connected. OpenAI presumably uses vector database tech under the hood for this, but to the enterprise user it’s seamless.

For developers inside a company, Enterprise might allow building custom solutions on top of ChatGPT’s capabilities (with the API or the upcoming ChatGPT function calling, etc.). Also, ChatGPT Enterprise comes with unlimited GPT-4 usage which is crucial for scaling within a company (no hitting message caps).

OpenAI has also introduced tools like ChatGPT Plugins which can be seen as developer support – external developers could create plugins that allow ChatGPT to interface with their service (e.g., a Jira plugin to fetch ticket info, or a database query plugin). Those were in beta and now with the agent paradigm they might evolve, but it shows an ecosystem approach.

Furthermore, OpenAI’s platform offers fine-tuning for some models (currently GPT-3.5 Turbo can be fine-tuned on custom data), which enterprises might use to specialize the model. ChatGPT itself in UI doesn’t use fine-tuned versions aside from its o-series, but enterprise could potentially get custom versions or at least rely on the retrieval integration for customization.

Perplexity for Enterprise/Business: Perplexity’s Enterprise Pro ($40/user) we described – it includes multi-user support and internal knowledge search. The internal knowledge search in Perplexity allows uploading up to 500 files for enterprise users. This is somewhat analogous to ChatGPT’s connectors, but it’s a more manual approach (upload documents and have them indexed for Q&A). It’s likely quite useful: employees can ask Perplexity something and it will search both the web and the company’s files to answer, citing internal docs where appropriate.

On security, Perplexity would need to provide privacy assurances to enterprises (their valuation and partnerships suggest they have big clients and thus must have a security story). The Airtel partnership (telecom giant in India) suggests enterprise trust. They likely offer encryption and a guarantee not to misuse client data. Possibly they will do SOC 2 compliance as well if not already.

For integration, does Perplexity allow hooking into other enterprise systems? Not explicitly known. They might allow feeding in some company database through the API or a custom pipeline. Because they now have an API, an enterprise could integrate Perplexity into, say, their intranet search bar.

Developer tooling: Perplexity doesn’t have a plugin system like ChatGPT. But it has Labs for Pro/Max users, which is a kind of low-code tool where you can chain prompts and actions to create mini-apps. For example, with Labs one can create a dashboard combining multiple queries, or an interactive prompt that asks the user for input then fetches info and displays it in a table. This is a developer-like capability aimed at non-developers (it orchestrates AI and possibly some web data in the background). Perplexity Max offers Unlimited Labs usage meaning one can rely heavily on this to build custom analyses. It’s more of a power user tool than a developer API, but it does allow creation of customized outputs.

Enterprise Max: Perplexity is planning an Enterprise Max tier with unlimited labs and presumably more admin features. At $200 per user, that’d be for serious use cases.

Support and Services: ChatGPT Enterprise comes with priority support, SLAs, and even AI advisors for large customers. This means enterprise clients get fast responses if something breaks and guidance on how to best use AI in their org. Perplexity being smaller might not have a huge support team, but Enterprise Pro likely includes some dedicated support (they do have an Intercom support channel for Pro users already).

Use in development workflows: ChatGPT has features like Code interpreter (Advanced Data Analysis) which effectively is a tool for technical users to test code or analyze data in a sandbox. While it’s user-facing, developers love it for quick prototyping or analyzing logs. Perplexity’s analog would be using Labs or just asking coding questions to GPT-4 via Perplexity. But ChatGPT’s environment that can run code and return results is unique and valuable for some dev tasks (like a built-in REPL with AI guidance).

Community and knowledge base: OpenAI has a large forum, documentation, and many example notebooks for developers. Perplexity’s developer docs are likely limited to their help center articles.

Third-party integration: ChatGPT can integrate with other apps via plugins or API. Perplexity did a partnership to integrate into a telecom’s offerings, and their Assistant can integrate with phone features (like summoning Uber via voice) – that’s an integration with iOS shortcuts perhaps. It shows they are exploring being part of a larger ecosystem.

Summing up: For enterprises, ChatGPT offers a more robust and fully-featured enterprise package (with strong security, customization via connectors, admin tools, and unlimited usage of the best models) which is unsurprising given OpenAI’s scale and focus on that segment. Perplexity offers a compelling but more niche enterprise solution – a focused AI research tool for teams, at a lower price point, which might be easier to deploy for certain use cases (especially knowledge management and search). Some companies might even use both: ChatGPT for general AI assistance and Perplexity for research and fact-checking tasks, depending on employees’ needs.

For developers, OpenAI’s platform is much more versatile, whereas Perplexity is more of a specialized API. If a developer’s goal is to add a self-citing Q&A feature to their product, Perplexity’s API could save them a lot of work (versus building a retrieval system on top of OpenAI). But for virtually anything else (conversation, creative generation, fine-tuned outputs, etc.), OpenAI’s offerings are the go-to.

____________

FOLLOW US FOR MORE.

DATA STUDIOS

datastudios.org