Best for reach / largest user base: ChatGPT
ChatGPT owns reach: 5.38B monthly visits against DeepSeek's 430.4M, a gap of roughly 4.95B visits. If you need the chatbot your colleagues and clients already have open in a tab, scale settles it.
DeepSeek is the pick for developers working on a zero budget; ChatGPT is the better default for nearly everyone else. DeepSeek's pricing lists Free with no paid plan, while ChatGPT's paid tier starts at $20/mo. But ChatGPT draws 5.38B monthly visits to DeepSeek's 430.4M — about 12.5x — and edges the quality score 85 to 84. DeepSeek if the constraint is cost, ChatGPT if it's capability.
Choose DeepSeek if you want coding and math help under an MIT open-source license, with no paid plan listed.
Choose ChatGPT if you want the full-range assistant — images, voice, and documents, plus integrations with GitHub, Figma, Dropbox, and Google Drive.
SearchTools shows what we haven't verified as openly as what we have. A grey dash (—) means not verified, never a confirmed no. Quality Score is our only aggregate — there is no overall "winner".
Praised
Complained about
Praised
Complained about
ChatGPT owns reach: 5.38B monthly visits against DeepSeek's 430.4M, a gap of roughly 4.95B visits. If you need the chatbot your colleagues and clients already have open in a tab, scale settles it.
ChatGPT rates 4.6 stars to DeepSeek's 4.5, but the decisive number is the sample: 2,743 G2 reviews versus 20, roughly 137x the evidence. A tenth of a star on 20 reviews isn't a verdict yet.
ChatGPT returns five output formats — text, images, code, documents, audio — against DeepSeek's two listed outputs, text and code. It also ingests video and audio, so image briefs and voice work stay in one tool.
DeepSeek carries a confirmed MIT open-source license; ChatGPT's open-source status is not verified in our data. For a team that must read and audit the model code before adoption, that single fact outweighs the one-point score gap.
Both ChatGPT and DeepSeek list a free tier. DeepSeek's pricing shows Free and lists no paid plan, so the entire product sits inside that tier; ChatGPT pairs its free tier with a paid subscription above it.
ChatGPT is built for it — its best-for list names writing, brainstorming, summarization, and translation, and it can generate articles, emails, and creative work. Its top recorded strength is versatile task handling across writing, coding, and research. The top complaint is accuracy issues and hallucinations, so verify anything load-bearing.
DeepSeek is aimed squarely at developers: its best-for list names developers, technical users, coding tasks, and math problems. Its top recorded strength is coding capability and debugging assistance, and it handles advanced reasoning plus agent-like tasks. The most-cited complaint is server busy errors and availability issues.
ChatGPT is listed on desktop alongside web, iOS, and Android — four platforms in total. DeepSeek is verified on web and iOS; desktop availability is not listed in our data. Both are native builds rather than wrappers.
ChatGPT requires an account before you can try it, so there is no anonymous demo in our data. For DeepSeek, the signup requirement is not verified either way, so plan on registering there too.
DeepSeek is the newer product, launching in 2024 — two years after ChatGPT's 2022 public debut. The gap shows in scope rather than polish: ChatGPT's feature list includes image generation and voice interaction, while DeepSeek's centers on code, math, and agent-like autonomy.
ChatGPT comes from OpenAI, headquartered in San Francisco and founded in 2015. DeepSeek comes from 杭州深度求索人工智能基础技术研究有限公司 in Hangzhou, China, a company founded in 2023 — eight years later. Those dates describe the companies, not the products.
ChatGPT holds the higher quality score, 85 to DeepSeek's 84 — one point, effectively a coin flip. ChatGPT's real separation is elsewhere: it lists six named integrations, including GitHub, Figma, Dropbox, and Google Drive. DeepSeek's integration coverage is not verified in our data.
0 to 100, weighted across adoption, reputation and trust. Our only aggregate, and never sold or sponsored.
Average and review count taken from the platform holding the deepest verified base for each tool.
Third-party estimate of monthly visits, refreshed monthly. Direction of travel is tracked; a growth percentage is never inferred from it.
Extracted from the vendor's own pricing page. Annual plans are converted to a monthly basis before any comparison, and a failed extraction is marked unverified rather than guessed.
Confirmed from official listings only. Nothing is inferred from marketing copy, and an unlisted feature is recorded as unverified, never as absent.
Recurring praise and complaint themes, ranked by how often they appear. Counts and shares stay in the pipeline and are not shown as evidence strings.
Every figure in the prose traces to a row in the table above. Copy is regenerated when the underlying data changes.