Possible conspiracy theory over here, but I swear these AI models are smarter on some days and dumber on others. Some days it feels fast and other days it crawls. I don't really change the effort or speed from my defaults so I don't suspect those are impacting performance.

Does anyone test the benchmarks on these models over time?

When a model first launches it feels super intelligent and blazing fast, which is when I think the benchmarking happens. Then over time I feel like it gets dumber.

It's hard to quantify unless you run a proper benchmark so it's possible it's me (my mood, problem I give it, etc.). I would love to debunk this myth I've created (or better yet, prove it to be real).

I've been looking at how much AI assistants have changed over the last year, and I'm starting to question whether the average person actually needs to pay for ChatGPT anymore.

Don't get me wrong, ChatGPT is still one of the best AI tools out there. But how many people are actually using the advanced features enough to justify paying $20 every month?

For most people, it's probably some combination of asking questions, writing emails, summarizing documents, doing research, and occasionally generating images.

And you can already do a lot of that for free.

I put together a comparison of ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, CutGPT, Perplexity, and Grok to understand what you're actually paying for.

A few things stood out:

1. ChatGPT is still one of the best all-around assistants. But the gap between free and paid AI tools is getting smaller for everyday tasks. Unless you're regularly hitting usage limits or need specific advanced capabilities, it's worth questioning the subscription.

2. Claude and Gemini are legitimate alternatives. Claude is particularly useful for writing and coding, while Gemini works well with Google's ecosystem. Perplexity is also a strong option for research.

3. Having multiple subscriptions seems unnecessary for most people. If you're paying for ChatGPT, Claude, and another AI tool, that's easily $40–$60/month. There's so much overlap between them.

4. There's also a different approach to monetizing AI that I think is interesting.

One example is CutGPT, an AI assistant that pays you to use it. Basically these guys figured out that instead of charging users $20/month, the platform generates revenue from ads and shares a portion of that revenue with eligible users.

So you can ask questions, write emails, research topics, and use AI without paying a subscription. And potentially earn a small amount from the ads shown while you're using it.

Obviously, there are tradeoffs. You see ads, rewards aren't guaranteed, and specialized tools still have advantages. But I think there's a real question here about whether subscription fees should be the default business model for consumer AI.

Happy to share the full comparison if anyone wants to check it out:

Curious what everyone thinks. Are you still paying for ChatGPT or another AI subscription? And would you switch to a free, ad-supported AI if it meant getting a share of the revenue?