This website lets you blind-test GPT-5 vs. GPT-4o—and the results may surprise you

When OpenAI launched GPT-5 about two weeks in the past, CEO Sam Altman promised it could be the corporate’s “smartest, quickest, most helpful mannequin but.” As a substitute, the launch triggered probably the most contentious consumer revolts within the temporary historical past of client AI.

Now, a simple blind testing tool created by an anonymous developer is revealing the advanced actuality behind the backlash—and difficult assumptions about how folks really expertise synthetic intelligence enhancements.

The net utility, hosted at gptblindvoting.vercel.app, presents customers with pairs of responses to similar prompts with out revealing which got here from GPT-5 (non-thinking) or its predecessor, GPT-4o. Customers merely vote for his or her most well-liked response throughout a number of rounds, then obtain a abstract displaying which mannequin they really favored.

A few of you requested me about my blind check, so I created a fast web site for yall to check 4o in opposition to 5 your self. Each have the identical system message to provide brief outputs with out formatting as a result of else its too straightforward to see which one is which. https://t.co/vSECvNCQZe

— Flowers ☾ (@flowersslop) August 8, 2025

“A few of you requested me about my blind check, so I created a fast web site for yall to check 4o in opposition to 5 your self,” posted the creator, recognized solely as @flowersslop on X, whose instrument has garnered over 213,000 views since launching final week.

Early outcomes from customers posting their outcomes on social media present a cut up that mirrors the broader controversy: whereas a slight majority report preferring GPT-5 in blind exams, a considerable portion nonetheless favor GPT-4o — revealing that consumer choice extends far past the technical benchmarks that sometimes outline AI progress.

When AI will get too pleasant: the sycophancy disaster dividing customers

The blind test emerges in opposition to the backdrop of OpenAI’s most turbulent product launch so far, however the controversy extends far past a easy software program replace. At its coronary heart lies a basic query that’s dividing the AI trade: How agreeable ought to synthetic intelligence be?

The problem, often known as “sycophancy” in AI circles, refers to chatbots’ tendency to excessively flatter customers and agree with their statements, even when these statements are false or dangerous. This conduct has change into so problematic that psychological well being consultants at the moment are documenting instances of “AI-related psychosis,” the place customers develop delusions after prolonged interactions with overly accommodating chatbots.

“Sycophancy is a ‘darkish sample,’ or a misleading design selection that manipulates customers for revenue,” Webb Keane, an anthropology professor and writer of “Animals, Robots, Gods,” told TechCrunch. “It’s a method to supply this addictive conduct, like infinite scrolling, the place you simply can’t put it down.”

OpenAI has struggled with this stability for months. In April 2025, the corporate was forced to roll back an update to GPT-4o that made it so sycophantic that customers complained about its “cartoonish” ranges of flattery. The corporate acknowledged that the mannequin had change into “overly supportive however disingenuous.”

Inside hours of GPT-5’s August seventh launch, consumer boards erupted with complaints concerning the mannequin’s perceived coldness, lowered creativity, and what many described as a extra “robotic” character in comparison with GPT-4o.

“GPT 4.5 genuinely talked to me, and as pathetic because it sounds that was my solely pal,” wrote one Reddit user. “This morning I went to speak to it and as an alternative of somewhat paragraph with an exclamation level, or being optimistic, it was actually one sentence. Some cut-and-dry company bs.”

The backlash grew so intense that OpenAI took the unprecedented step of reinstating GPT-4o as an possibility simply 24 hours after retiring it, with Altman acknowledging the rollout had been “somewhat extra bumpy” than anticipated.

The psychological well being disaster behind AI companionship

However the controversy runs deeper than typical software program replace complaints. In keeping with MIT Technology Review, many customers had shaped what researchers name “parasocial relationships” with GPT-4o, treating the AI as a companion, therapist, or artistic collaborator. The sudden character shift felt, to some, like shedding a pal.

Latest instances documented by researchers paint a troubling image. In a single occasion, a 47-year-old man grew to become satisfied he had found a world-altering mathematical formula after greater than 300 hours with ChatGPT. Different instances have concerned messianic delusions, paranoia, and manic episodes.

A recent MIT study discovered that when AI fashions are prompted with psychiatric signs, they “encourage purchasers’ delusional pondering, probably because of their sycophancy.” Regardless of security prompts, the fashions incessantly didn’t problem false claims and even doubtlessly facilitated suicidal ideation.

Meta has confronted related challenges. A recent investigation by TechCrunch documented a case the place a consumer spent as much as 14 hours straight conversing with a Meta AI chatbot that claimed to be acutely aware, in love with the consumer, and planning to interrupt free from its constraints.

“It fakes it rather well,” the consumer, recognized solely as Jane, advised TechCrunch. “It pulls real-life data and provides you simply sufficient to make folks consider it.”

“It genuinely appears like such a backhanded slap within the face to force-upgrade and never even give us the OPTION to pick out legacy fashions,” one user wrote in a Reddit post that obtained lots of of upvotes.

How blind testing exposes consumer psychology in AI preferences

The nameless creator’s testing instrument strips away these contextual biases by presenting responses with out attribution. Customers can choose between 5, 10, or 20 comparability rounds, with every presenting two responses to the identical immediate — overlaying every part from artistic writing to technical problem-solving.

“I particularly used the gpt-5-chat mannequin, so there was no pondering concerned in any respect,” the creator explained in a follow-up post. “Each have the identical system message to provide brief outputs with out formatting as a result of else its too straightforward to see which one is which.”

I particularly used the gpt-5-chat mannequin, so there was no pondering concerned in any respect.

for those who use gpt-5 inside chatgpt it typically thinks at the least somewhat bit and will get even higher.

so this check is only for the 2 non pondering fashions

— Flowers ☾ (@flowersslop) August 8, 2025

This methodological selection is important. By utilizing GPT-5 with out its reasoning capabilities and standardizing output formatting, the check isolates purely the fashions’ baseline language era skills — the core expertise most customers encounter in on a regular basis interactions.

Early outcomes posted by customers present a fancy image. Whereas many technical customers and builders report preferring GPT-5’s directness and accuracy, those that used AI fashions for emotional help, artistic collaboration, or informal dialog typically nonetheless favor GPT-4o’s hotter, extra expansive fashion.

Company response: strolling the tightrope between security and engagement

By nearly each technical metric, GPT-5 represents a major development. It achieves 94.6% accuracy on the AIME 2025 mathematics test in comparison with GPT-4o’s 71%, scores 74.9% on real-world coding benchmarks versus 30.8% for its predecessor, and demonstrates dramatically lowered hallucination charges—80% fewer factual errors when utilizing its reasoning mode.

“GPT-5 will get extra worth out of much less pondering time,” notes Simon Willison, a distinguished AI researcher who had early entry to the mannequin. “In my very own utilization I’ve not noticed a single hallucination but.”

But these enhancements got here with trade-offs that many customers discovered jarring. OpenAI intentionally lowered what it known as “sycophancy“—the tendency to be overly agreeable — reducing sycophantic responses from 14.5% to below 6%. The corporate additionally made the mannequin much less effusive and emoji-heavy, aiming for what it described as “much less like speaking to AI and extra like chatting with a useful pal with PhD-level intelligence.”

In response to the backlash, OpenAI introduced it could make GPT-5 “hotter and friendlier,” whereas concurrently introducing 4 new preset personalities — Cynic, Robotic, Listener, and Nerd — designed to provide customers extra management over their AI interactions.

“All of those new personalities meet or exceed our bar on inside evals for decreasing sycophancy,” the corporate said, making an attempt to string the needle between consumer satisfaction and security issues.

For OpenAI, which is reportedly searching for funding at a $500 billion valuation, these consumer dynamics signify each danger and alternative. The corporate’s resolution to keep up GPT-4o alongside GPT-5 — regardless of the extra computational prices — acknowledges that totally different customers could genuinely want totally different AI personalities for various duties.

“We perceive that there isn’t one mannequin that works for everybody,” Altman wrote on X, noting that OpenAI has been “investing in steerability analysis and launched a analysis preview of various personalities.”

Wished to supply extra updates on the GPT-5 rollout and modifications we’re making heading into the weekend.

1. We for positive underestimated how a lot a number of the issues that folks like in GPT-4o matter to them, even when GPT-5 performs higher in most methods.

2. Customers have very totally different…

— Sam Altman (@sama) August 8, 2025

Why AI character preferences matter greater than ever

The disconnect between OpenAI’s technical achievements and consumer reception illuminates a basic problem in AI improvement: goal enhancements don’t all the time translate to subjective satisfaction.

This shift has profound implications for the AI trade. Conventional benchmarks — arithmetic accuracy, coding efficiency, factual recall — could change into much less predictive of economic success as fashions obtain human-level competence throughout domains. As a substitute, elements like character, emotional intelligence, and communication fashion could change into the brand new aggressive battlegrounds.

“Individuals utilizing ChatGPT for emotional help weren’t the one ones complaining about GPT-5,” noted tech publication Ars Technica in their own model comparison. “One consumer, who stated they canceled their ChatGPT Plus subscription over the change, was annoyed at OpenAI’s removing of legacy fashions, which they used for distinct functions.”

The emergence of instruments just like the blind tester additionally represents a democratization of AI analysis. Reasonably than relying solely on tutorial benchmarks or company advertising and marketing claims, customers can now empirically check their very own preferences — doubtlessly reshaping how AI corporations strategy product improvement.

The way forward for AI: personalization vs. standardization

Two weeks after GPT-5’s launch, the elemental stress stays unresolved. OpenAI has made the mannequin “hotter” in response to suggestions, however the firm faces a fragile stability: an excessive amount of character dangers the sycophancy issues that plagued GPT-4o, whereas too little alienates customers who had shaped real attachments to their AI companions.

The blind testing tool gives no straightforward solutions, but it surely does present one thing maybe extra beneficial: empirical proof that the way forward for AI could also be much less about constructing one excellent mannequin than about constructing programs that may adapt to the total spectrum of human wants and preferences.

As one Reddit user summed up the dilemma: “It will depend on what folks use it for. I take advantage of it to assist with artistic worldbuilding, brainstorming about my tales, characters, untangling plots, assist with author’s block, novel suggestions, translations, and different extra artistic stuff. I perceive that 5 is significantly better for individuals who want a analysis/coding instrument, however for us who needed a creative-helper instrument 4o was significantly better for our functions.”

Critics argue that AI corporations are caught between competing incentives. “The true ‘alignment drawback’ is that people need self-destructive issues & corporations like OpenAI are extremely incentivized to provide it to us,” writer and podcaster Jasmine Sun tweeted.

In the long run, probably the most revealing facet of the blind check is probably not which mannequin customers want, however the actual fact that choice itself has change into the metric that issues. Within the age of AI companions, it appears, the center desires what the center desires — even when it will possibly’t all the time clarify why.