This web site enables you to blind-test GPT-5 vs. GPT-4o—and the outcomes could shock 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 an alternative, the launch triggered one of the crucial contentious consumer revolts within the temporary historical past of shopper AI.

Now, a easy blind testing instrument created by an nameless developer is revealing the complicated actuality behind the backlash—and difficult assumptions about how folks really expertise synthetic intelligence enhancements.

The online utility, hosted at gptblindvoting.vercel.app, presents customers with pairs of responses to equivalent 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 popular 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 towards 5 your self. Each have the identical system message to present brief outputs with out formatting as a result of else its too simple 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 towards 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 break up that mirrors the broader controversy: whereas a slight majority report preferring GPT-5 in blind checks, a considerable portion nonetheless favor GPT-4o — revealing that consumer desire extends far past the technical benchmarks that sometimes outline AI progress.

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

The blind check emerges towards the backdrop of OpenAI’s most turbulent product launch up to now, however the controversy extends far past a easy software program replace. At its coronary heart lies a elementary query that’s dividing the AI business: How agreeable ought to synthetic intelligence be?

The difficulty, generally 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 turn out to be so problematic that psychological well being specialists 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 alternative that manipulates customers for revenue,” Webb Keane, an anthropology professor and creator of “Animals, Robots, Gods,” informed 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 steadiness for months. In April 2025, the corporate was compelled to roll again an replace to GPT-4o that made it so sycophantic that customers complained about its “cartoonish” ranges of flattery. The corporate acknowledged that the mannequin had turn out to be “overly supportive however disingenuous.”

Inside hours of GPT-5’s August seventh launch, consumer boards erupted with complaints concerning the mannequin’s perceived coldness, decreased 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 buddy,” wrote one Reddit consumer. “This morning I went to speak to it and as a substitute of a little bit 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 “a little bit extra bumpy” than anticipated.

The psychological well being disaster behind AI companionship

However the controversy runs deeper than typical software program replace complaints. In line with MIT Expertise Overview, many customers had fashioned 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 buddy.

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 system after greater than 300 hours with ChatGPT. Different instances have concerned messianic delusions, paranoia, and manic episodes.

A current MIT examine discovered that when AI fashions are prompted with psychiatric signs, they “encourage shoppers’ delusional pondering, possible attributable to their sycophancy.” Regardless of security prompts, the fashions often didn’t problem false claims and even probably facilitated suicidal ideation.

Meta has confronted related challenges. A current 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, informed TechCrunch. “It pulls real-life info and provides you simply sufficient to make folks imagine it.”

“It genuinely seems like such a backhanded slap within the face to force-upgrade and never even give us the OPTION to pick legacy fashions,” one consumer wrote in a Reddit publish that obtained tons 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 — masking 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 defined in a follow-up publish. “Each have the identical system message to present brief outputs with out formatting as a result of else its too simple to see which one is which.”

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

in the event you use gpt-5 inside chatgpt it usually thinks at the least a little bit bit and will get even higher.

so this check is only for the 2 non pondering fashions

— Flowers ☾ (@flowersslop) August 8, 2025

This methodological alternative 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 posh image. Whereas many technical customers and builders report preferring GPT-5’s directness and accuracy, those that used AI fashions for emotional assist, artistic collaboration, or informal dialog usually nonetheless favor GPT-4o’s hotter, extra expansive fashion.

Company response: strolling the tightrope between security and engagement

By just about each technical metric, GPT-5 represents a major development. It achieves 94.6% accuracy on the AIME 2025 arithmetic check in comparison with GPT-4o’s 71%, scores 74.9% on real-world coding benchmarks versus 30.8% for its predecessor, and demonstrates dramatically decreased 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 decreased what it known as “sycophancy“—the tendency to be overly agreeable — slicing sycophantic responses from 14.5% to underneath 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 buddy 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 present customers extra management over their AI interactions.

“All of those new personalities meet or exceed our bar on inner evals for lowering sycophancy,” the corporate acknowledged, 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 characterize each danger and alternative. The corporate’s resolution to take care of GPT-4o alongside GPT-5 — regardless of the extra computational prices — acknowledges that completely different customers could genuinely want completely 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 certain underestimated how a lot among the issues that individuals like in GPT-4o matter to them, even when GPT-5 performs higher in most methods.

2. Customers have very completely 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 elementary problem in AI growth: goal enhancements don’t at all times translate to subjective satisfaction.

This shift has profound implications for the AI business. Conventional benchmarks — arithmetic accuracy, coding efficiency, factual recall — could turn out to be much less predictive of economic success as fashions obtain human-level competence throughout domains. As an alternative, components like character, emotional intelligence, and communication fashion could turn out to be the brand new aggressive battlegrounds.

“Folks utilizing ChatGPT for emotional assist weren’t the one ones complaining about GPT-5,” famous tech publication Ars Technica in their very own mannequin comparability. “One consumer, who mentioned 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. Slightly than relying solely on tutorial benchmarks or company advertising and marketing claims, customers can now empirically check their very own preferences — probably reshaping how AI firms strategy product growth.

The way forward for AI: personalization vs. standardization

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

The blind testing instrument gives no simple 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 good mannequin than about constructing techniques that may adapt to the total spectrum of human wants and preferences.

As one Reddit consumer summed up the dilemma: “It is determined by what folks use it for. I exploit 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 wished a creative-helper instrument 4o was significantly better for our functions.”

Critics argue that AI firms are caught between competing incentives. “The actual ‘alignment downside’ is that people need self-destructive issues & firms like OpenAI are extremely incentivized to present it to us,” author and podcaster Jasmine Solar tweeted.

Ultimately, probably the most revealing facet of the blind check might not be which mannequin customers choose, however the actual fact that desire itself has turn out to be the metric that issues. Within the age of AI companions, it appears, the center desires what the center desires — even when it could’t at all times clarify why.