By Meka Coven
When ChatGPT and Claude give different answers, it is tempting to add Gemini and pick the reply that sounds best. That is a quick way to make the test messy. If the prompt, context, or follow-up changes between services, you are comparing the setup as much as the models.
A useful three-model test is quieter. Choose one real task, keep the conditions fixed, and use Gemini as another point of comparison rather than a tie-breaker. The goal is to find an answer you can check and use for this job, not to create a permanent ranking.
If you want to send the same question to selected AI services without pasting it into three tabs, SuperCompareAI keeps that repeated setup in one browser flow.
• Introduce: https://www.supercompareai.com/
• Chrome extension: https://chromewebstore.google.com/detail/supercompareai-compare-ch/fhbnhohjeakmodifnnmpmphacbnolfhf
Start with a task you can inspect
Pick work you actually repeat: a planning memo, a code review, a research outline, or a rewrite with clear constraints. A clever puzzle can produce an entertaining answer, but it tells you little about the work waiting on your desk.
Before you start, write down:
• What the answer needs to help you decide or deliver
• Which facts, examples, files, and links the models may use
• The audience, length, format, and other limits
• Which claims need a source or a separate check
• What would make one answer easier to use than another
Then write one prompt for all three services:
Prompt example
I am working on [specific task]. Use only the context below. Give me a recommendation, the assumptions behind it, two risks, and the next action. Mark any claim that needs external verification.
Run the prompt in ChatGPT, Claude, and Gemini without changing the wording. Give each service the same context and files when the service supports them. If one service cannot accept part of the material, record that as a condition of the test instead of quietly changing the input.
Read agreement and disagreement separately
Read all three answers once before choosing a favorite. On the second pass, record what happened:
• What do all three answers agree on?
• Where do ChatGPT and Claude take different paths?
• What does Gemini add, question, or leave out?
• Which answer followed the requested format and constraints?
• Which facts, assumptions, or links still need checking?
• Can you act on the next step without filling in missing pieces?
Agreement is evidence, not proof. Three answers can repeat the same weak assumption when they receive the same incomplete context. A different answer is not automatically better either. Keep the reason for your choice next to the claim or section you actually used.
An AI comparison tool can take care of the repeated question while you do this review. SuperCompareAI is a Chrome extension that lets you select AI services, ask multiple AI models at once, and compare the answers side by side. The official site currently lists 12 selectable services: ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, Perplexity, Google AI Studio, Grok, GenSpark, Qwen, DeepSeek, Copilot, Z.ai, and Kimi.
The official product pages describe browser-side use with the AI accounts you already use and state that AI provider API keys are not required. They also describe local browser history, question templates, custom sites, and file or image attachments. Those are product capabilities. They do not tell you which answer is correct for your work.
• Introduce: https://www.supercompareai.com/
• Chrome extension: https://chromewebstore.google.com/detail/supercompareai-compare-ch/fhbnhohjeakmodifnnmpmphacbnolfhf
Give the same follow-up to all three
A first answer often hides an assumption. Send the same second question to ChatGPT, Claude, and Gemini instead of fixing only the answer you like least:
Prompt example
Review your previous answer. Name one assumption that could fail, one claim I should verify, and one change you would make if the audience were [audience].
Compare the revisions as carefully as the first responses. Did a model notice a real gap? Did it change a claim without explaining why? Did it ask for information that the original prompt did not provide?
If you add a third model after seeing two answers, do not show it those answers unless you are running a separate synthesis test. A model that reacts to earlier outputs is answering a different prompt. Keep that round separate in your notes.
Keep product facts apart from test findings
The extension sending one question to selected AI services in one browser flow is a product fact. The result you get from ChatGPT, Claude, and Gemini on your own task is your test finding. The first belongs to the official product pages. The second needs your prompt, context, and review record.
That distinction keeps your notes honest. Instead of writing "Gemini was more accurate," write what happened: which task you ran, what each service received, which claim you checked, and why one answer was easier to use.
Keep a short comparison record
Save a small note after each run:
• The exact prompt and prompt version
• The services, context, files, and links you supplied
• Claims that still need verification
• The answer or section you used
• What changed after the shared follow-up
• Why the result fits, or does not fit, this task
After a few real tasks, you will have something more useful than one unusually polished reply. You will know which answers were easy to check, which ones produced usable next actions, and where all three needed your judgment.
Choose for the task in front of you
ChatGPT vs Claude is a sensible starting pair. Gemini can add another reading when the task benefits from it. None of these comparisons turns one session into a universal verdict.
If you want to compare multiple AI models simultaneously without rebuilding the same prompt in several tabs, SuperCompareAI keeps the question, selected services, and answer review in one browser workflow. You still choose what to trust after checking the evidence.
• Introduce: https://www.supercompareai.com/
• Chrome extension: https://chromewebstore.google.com/detail/supercompareai-compare-ch/fhbnhohjeakmodifnnmpmphacbnolfhf
Written by Meka Coven.
