The Ultimate AI Model Showdown for Customer Service: ChatGPT vs. ClaudeAI

Chatbot talking with human on summer evening

The expectations for customer service have dramatically transformed, customers demand quick, efficient, and personalized responses 24/7. Enter the realm of Artificial Intelligence (AI), which has revolutionized how businesses interact with their customers. AI-powered chatbots and virtual assistants can handle a myriad of customer service tasks, from answering FAQs to solving complex queries, thereby enhancing customer satisfaction and loyalty while reducing operational costs.

Among the forefront of this technological evolution are so far two notable contenders: ChatGPT with its Large Language Models (LLMs) GPT-3.5 and GPT-4, and Anthropic with its diverse Claude models - Opus, Sonnet, and Haiku. These AI models are redefining customer service, offering unique capabilities to meet the varied needs of businesses and customers alike.

The Contenders

ChatGPT (GPT-3.5 and GPT-4), developed by OpenAI, has emerged as a powerful tool in the AI landscape. With GPT-3.5, users were introduced to an advanced level of understanding and generating human-like text, capable of answering questions, writing essays, and even composing poetry. This model was a significant step up from its predecessors, offering improved coherence over longer conversations and a better grasp of complex instructions.

Here is how to set up an OpenAI API key to use ChatGPT in Chaterimo.

The evolution continued with GPT-4, which took the capabilities of GPT-3.5 to new heights. GPT-4 not only improved upon the linguistic finesse and understanding of its predecessor but also boasted enhanced factual accuracy and a more nuanced grasp of user instructions. GPT-4’s ability to understand and generate text based on images (image to text) further expanded its utility, making it a versatile tool for a wide range of customer service scenarios.

ClaudeAI (Opus, Sonnet, Haiku) presents a suite of models, each designed with specific strengths to cater to different aspects of customer interaction and engagement.

Opus, the flagship model, is celebrated for its ability to understand and generate natural language responses that are not just accurate but also contextually rich, making it ideal for handling complex customer service interactions. Sonnet, on the other hand, is designed for businesses prioritizing speed and efficiency. It offers quick, concise responses, perfect for live chat environments where time is of the essence. Lastly, Haiku is known for its brevity and wit, delivering responses with a creative twist that can be particularly engaging in marketing or when a light-hearted touch is needed.

Each model within ClaudeAI’s arsenal brings something unique to the table, from Opus’s depth and understanding to Sonnet’s speed and Haiku’s creativity, offering businesses a range of options to customize their customer service experience.

Also, have a look at how to set up an Anthropic API key to use Claude in Chaterimo.

Comparison Criteria

In selecting the best AI model for customer service, businesses must weigh several crucial factors. Here we delve into three key aspects: pricing, speed, and online reviews, which collectively shape the efficiency, cost-effectiveness, and overall satisfaction in customer interactions.

1. Pricing

ChatGPT (GPT-3.5 and GPT-4): OpenAI provides a tiered pricing model for ChatGPT, with GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 having distinct pricing structures. GPT-3.5, being older, is typically less expensive, making it a cost-effective option for startups and small businesses. GPT-4, with its advanced capabilities, comes at a premium but offers more value in handling complex interactions. Both versions offer subscription plans with included monthly requests and additional charges for extra usage. This flexible pricing structure allows businesses to scale their operations according to demand.

ClaudeAI (Opus, Sonnet, Haiku): ClaudeAI's pricing details may vary based on the specific model and usage volume. Similar to ChatGPT, Claude's models offer tiered pricing based on the complexity of tasks and volume of interactions, allowing businesses to choose a plan that best fits their needs and budget.

Our testing results: Chaterimo tested GPT-3.5 for its customer service for a period of 3 months, overall dealing with a few queries per day, and the monthly billing for GPT-3.5 did not exceed $5. When testing GPT-4, the price increased much more (even 4 times more compared to GPT-3.5). It should be added that the answers in some cases were much better and the model was able to cope. A similar lower outcome was observed in testing Claude Sonnet and Opus. Sonnet had slightly lower prices to GPT-3.5 and Opus was priced slightly lower than GPT-4.

2. Speed

ChatGPT (GPT-3.5 and GPT-4): Both GPT-3.5 boast impressive speed, delivering responses in a matter of seconds. The speed can vary depending on the complexity of the query and the server load at the time of the request. GPT-4's enhancements include optimizations that offer slower response times for complex queries compared to GPT-3.5, despite its more sophisticated processing.

ClaudeAI (Opus, Sonnet, Haiku): ClaudeAI models are designed with speed in mind, ensuring quick interactions that keep pace with customer expectations. Sonnet, in particular, is optimized for rapid response, making it ideal for real-time customer service chats. The actual speed can depend on several factors, including the model used (Opus, Sonnet, or Haiku) and the current workload on ClaudeAI's servers.

Our testing results: During our testing, people never complained about the speed with GPT-3.5 and Claude Sonnet. With GPT-4 and Claude Opus, sometimes they did, and sometimes they left the page (the chat) before the AI finished writing a response to their query - this happened usually with very complex questions.

3. Online Reviews

ChatGPT (GPT-3.5 and GPT-4): Online reviews for ChatGPT's GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 are generally positive, with users praising their advanced conversational abilities and the human-like quality of their responses. GPT-4, in particular, receives accolades for its improved accuracy and broader knowledge base. Some criticism revolves around occasional misunderstandings, ignoring system prompts, or irrelevant responses, though these issues are less frequent with GPT-4.

ClaudeAI (Opus, Sonnet, Haiku): ClaudeAI models receive high marks for their human-like interactions and the ability to maintain engaging and dynamic conversations. Users appreciate the nuanced responses that feel personalized and thoughtful. ClaudeAI occasionally ignores system prompts or generates content based on imagined concepts, which can be problematic in customer service scenarios where accuracy and adherence to guidelines are critical.

Our testing results: During our testing, we did not see significant differences in behavior. The models were able to respond very accurately. However, with ClaudeAI (Sonnet), we observed several instances of AI hallucinations, where, for example, the model reported non-existent reviews from companies with which the given company had no business dealings and such reviews were not even in the knowledge base.

To explore the evolution and capabilities of modern AI in customer service, delve into our comprehensive article. We cover the journey from simple scripted chatbots to advanced AI models like ChatGPT and ClaudeAI, discussing their roles in revolutionizing e-commerce and web interactions. Learn more about their potential to personalize communication and streamline service on our blog.

4. Context Length

ChatGPT (GPT-3.5 and GPT-4): GPT-3.5 demonstrated significant improvements in handling longer contexts compared to its predecessors, enabling it to maintain coherent conversations over several exchanges. However, it occasionally struggles with very long or complex dialogues where maintaining context is crucial. GPT-4 advances the ability to manage extended conversations dramatically, with a notable increase in maintaining context over long dialogues and understanding nuanced or complicated customer queries. This makes GPT-4 exceptionally well-suited for intricate customer service interactions that require an understanding of detailed history or complex issues.

ClaudeAI (Opus, Sonnet, Haiku): ClaudeAI models, particularly Opus, are designed with an emphasis on understanding and maintaining context in conversations. This allows them to handle long and complex dialogues effectively, ensuring that customer interactions remain relevant and personalized over time. While Sonnet and Haiku are also capable of managing extended conversations, their design priorities (speed and creativity, respectively) may impact their performance in highly complex or lengthy interactions compared to Opus.

Our testing results: Regarding context length, Claude's models come out on top. However, it is generally better to build a smaller and higher-quality knowledge base rather than filling it with unnecessary information. This step will speed up the model's thought process, refine the answers, and reduce the costs of interactions with AI. As a result, your AI customer service will always be efficient.

5. Human-like Responses

ChatGPT (GPT-3.5 and GPT-4): ChatGPT models, especially GPT-4, are renowned for generating responses that closely mimic human conversational patterns. This includes the use of natural language, appropriate tones, and contextual understanding that enhances the customer service experience. The progression from GPT-3.5 to GPT-4 includes improvements in subtlety, nuance, and the ability to convey empathy, making interactions feel more genuine and human-like.

ClaudeAI (Opus, Sonnet, Haiku): ClaudeAI is often highlighted for its exceptionally human-like interactions. Its models tend to provide responses that not only answer the user's query but do so with a level of creativity and personality that closely resembles human conversation. This "human touch" can be particularly effective in customer service, where empathy and understanding are paramount, though it comes with the caveat of occasionally straying from system prompts or creating imaginative content.

Our testing results: During testing, we noticed that GPT-3.5 provided very directive and clear responses. In our opinion, the GPT-4 model was more informative and detailed. As for Claude Sonnet and Opus, in our view, they are better at mimicking human communication, making the entire interaction much more human-like compared to the GPT models. Claude Sonnet was able to provide informative and detailed responses very quickly and led the communication throughout without repeating sentences, always managing to out-talk them, much like a human would.

6. Handling of System Prompts

ChatGPT (GPT-3.5 and GPT-4): Both GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 show strong adherence to system prompts, understanding and acting within the constraints and roles defined by users. This makes them reliable for structured customer service scenarios where specific outcomes or processes must be followed. Instances of ignoring system prompts or generating unrelated content are relatively rare, especially with GPT-4, which has improved understanding of complex instructions.

ClaudeAI (Opus, Sonnet, Haiku): While ClaudeAI excels in human-like responses, it has shown a tendency to occasionally overlook system prompts or generate information that doesn't exist. This behavior can pose challenges in customer service settings where accuracy and adherence to guidelines are crucial. The issue seems to stem from its emphasis on creating engaging, human-like interactions, which can sometimes lead to overly creative responses that stray from the user's original intent.

Our testing results: As we have already mentioned, sometimes a question is asked in such a way that the model (whether GPT or Claude) tends to either ignore or partially ignore the system settings. With Claude's models, as we have already written above, there is a higher number of hallucinations in the responses. However, we are convinced that the models will continue to improve and that such cases will not increase.


The evolution and deployment of large language models (LLMs) in customer service have shown remarkable progress, offering nuanced interactions that can significantly enhance customer satisfaction and operational efficiency. From the testing results and comparative analysis across pricing, speed, online reviews, context length, human-like responses, and handling of system prompts, several conclusions emerge:

  • Cost-Effectiveness vs. Advanced Capabilities: GPT-3.5 emerges as a cost-effective solution for startups and smaller businesses, providing swift and directive responses. However, GPT-4, despite its higher cost, offers more detailed and informative responses, making it a valuable option for handling complex customer interactions. ClaudeAI models, particularly Sonnet, represent a balanced choice, with pricing and capabilities that straddle those of GPT-3.5 and GPT-4, offering rapid and nuanced responses.
  • Speed and Efficiency: GPT-3.5 and Claude Sonnet excel in delivering quick responses, crucial for maintaining customer engagement in real-time interactions. GPT-4 and Claude Opus, while sometimes slower, offer depth in their responses, which can be vital for complex queries but may risk losing customer engagement if responses are not timely.
  • Human-Like Interactions: ClaudeAI models excel in mimicking human-like interactions, providing responses that are not just accurate but also engaging and empathetic, closely resembling human conversation. This contrasts with the more directive responses of GPT-3.5 and the detailed, yet sometimes less immediate, responses of GPT-4.
  • Contextual Understanding: ClaudeAI's superior performance in handling long and complex dialogues highlights its strength in maintaining context over extended interactions. GPT-4 also shows significant improvements in managing extended conversations, making both sets of models well-suited for intricate customer service scenarios.
  • Adherence to System Prompts: While all models demonstrate a capacity to follow system prompts, instances of ignoring or partially ignoring them—especially in ClaudeAI—underscore the ongoing challenge of balancing creative, engaging responses with the need for accuracy and adherence to guidelines.
  • Continuous Improvement: The observation of hallucinations and occasional inaccuracies, particularly in ClaudeAI models, points to areas for improvement. However, the conviction that these models will continue to evolve suggests a promising trajectory toward even more sophisticated and reliable customer service solutions.

In summary, choosing the right AI model for customer service requires balancing various factors, including cost, speed, the complexity of customer interactions, and the value of human-like engagement. GPT and ClaudeAI models offer a range of options that cater to different business needs and customer service strategies. Continuous advancements in these technologies are likely to further enhance their effectiveness and efficiency.

Copyright © Chaterimo