What's the Difference Between LLMs?

‍

Note: The following was generated by AI based on the real-life conversation in the video above. We highly recommend watching the entire video, especially where you get to see Rob tear apart "LinkedIn Hustle Culture." But if you're in a pinch, the following text will serve as a good TL;DR.

With the rapid advancement of large language models (LLMs) like GPT-4, it can be challenging to determine which model is best suited for your needs. Should you use Claude 1, Claude 2, GPT-3.5, or GPT-4?

Each model has its own strengths and limitations that are important to understand when selecting the right LLM for your goals.

In a recent conversation, AI expert Rob provided insight into the key differences between Anthropic's Claude 1 and 2, along with OpenAI's GPT-3.5, and GPT-4 to help guide your model selection process.

By evaluating the unique capabilities of each model, you can make an informed decision based on your specific use case requirements around speed, cost, and output quality.

The overview of the latest LLMs here aims to shed light on where each model may fall short.

With clear knowledge of their respective strengths and weaknesses, you'll be equipped to choose the optimal large language model to power your AI application and align with your business needs.

Claude's Strengths and Limitations

Claude is Anthropic's proprietary large language model that comes in two versions - Claude 1 and Claude 2.

Claude 1 generates text rapidly, completing tasks in seconds rather than minutes. This speed makes Claude 1 well-suited for high volume applications where fast response time is critical.

However, the tradeoff for Claude 1's speed is lower overall output quality.

The model struggles with complex reasoning and instructions, producing more inconsistent results. Simple autocompletion and content generation tasks work well, but anything requiring deeper understanding or analysis will be limited. Claude 1 also has a smaller context window than other models, further restricting its capabilities.

For use cases emphasizing fast turnaround over output sophistication, Claude 1 excels. But those needing higher accuracy, reasoning, and consistent quality are better served by Claude 2 or other models like GPT-3.5 and GPT-4.

Determining priorities around speed versus quality will inform whether Claude 1's strengths outweigh its limitations for your needs.

Comparing GPT-3.5 and GPT-4

GPT-3.5 is known for its speed and ability to generate text quickly. However, it can sometimes struggle with handling more complex instructions and logical reasoning. GPT-3.5 works well for more straightforward text generation tasks, but fails to match the nuance and depth you'll get from GPT-4.

GPT-4, on the other hand, is able to produce the highest quality outputs of the models discussed here.

It demonstrates strong reasoning skills, causality, and a depth of knowledge that allows it to generate sophisticated text across a wide range of topics. However, you pay for this advanced capability - GPT-4 is more costly to use than GPT-3.5 and both Claude 1 and 2.

So in summary, GPT-3.5 is a fast but limited model in terms of complexity, while GPT-4 provides superb quality and advanced reasoning, but at a higher price point.

Finessing Models for Optimal Performance

Prompting is crucial when using large language models like Claude 1, 2,GPT-3.5 and GPT-4. Providing more specific instructions and examples in the prompt improves the quality of the model's outputs. The prompt essentially guides the model on the tone, style, level of detail required.

Without clear prompting, the outputs may not align with what you need.

Finessing your prompts through an iterative process helps achieve more consistent, desired results across multiple queries. The first few tries may produce irrelevant or repetitive text, but refining the examples and instructions pushes the model in the right direction.

Performance can also vary from run-to-run, even when using the same prompt.

Factors like the selected model, temperature, and number of tokens generated impact consistency. Adjustingthese parameters in conjunction with the prompt increases the chances of accurate outputs.

Over time, prompting becomes intuitive as you learn what wording works best for different models and use cases. Investing in prompt engineering is key to unlocking the full potential of large language models. The performance gains are well worth the extra effort.

Real-World Applications

Choosing the right large language model involves evaluating use cases and making tradeoffs between speed, cost, and quality. The unique capabilities of Claude, GPT-3.5, and GPT-4 lend themselves to different real-world applications.

• ‍Customer service chatbots - Claude's speed makes it ideal for rapidly generating responses to customer inquiries. While quality may be lower, the high volume capacity matches most conversational use cases.
• Market research surveys - GPT-3.5 can quickly generate survey questions to gather consumer insights. The model struggles with complex instructions but basic surveys are a good match for its speed and cost profile.
• Data analysis and reporting - GPT-4's advanced reasoning skills provide the highest quality data interpretation and analysis. The premium cost can be justified for business intelligence use cases that rely on logical analysis.
• Creative content generation - Claude 2 and GPT-4 are well-suited for creative writing that requires higher quality outputs. Their capacity for originality and reasoning exceeds GPT-3.5 for fiction writing or marketing copy.
• Workflow automation - Forms allow embedding Claude and GPT-3.5 models into internal tools to enrich data or provide AI assistance. The fast generation works well for structured workflows.

Evaluating use case requirements and model capabilities is key for selecting the right large language model. The ideal choice balances speed, cost, and quality based on the application.

We recommend using the following workflow to test which gives you the best output: 

While you can't finesse the model's instructions, you can be as specific as you'd like with the text input. Start with the type of resource you use most (data anlaysis, social posts, blog posts, etc.) and see which gives you the best version out-of-the-box.

Then, when you build a more advanced workflow to help your specific needs, you can finesse the prompt and background to get the output you need that much more quickly.

‍