Which AI should you use?
Five questions. One recommendation, plus two alternatives, plus the reasoning. Covers Claude, ChatGPT, Gemini, and Llama in 2026. Free, no signup, runs in your browser.
Claude · ChatGPT · Gemini · Llama
What are you mostly using AI for?
Pick the closest fit. We'll factor in secondary uses too.
How the picker decides
Each of the 11 models is scored against your five answers. The biggest weight is on use case, the model has to be one of the category leaders for what you're doing. The next biggest is access method, a model that needs API access loses points if you said you only have a consumer subscription. Then context size, then budget, then provider preference (which we honour if it's compatible with the rest, and explain if we deviate).
The logic is rules-based, not LLM-generated. The same answers always produce the same recommendation. Pricing and benchmark data are kept current with each provider's published numbers.
Best AI for writing
Claude (Opus 4.7 for deep work, Sonnet 4.6 as the daily driver). Third-party blind preference tests have put Claude at the top for prose since mid-2025. Lower rate of AI-signature phrasing means less editing per shipped line.
Best AI for coding
Claude Opus 4.7 for agentic and multi-file work; GPT-5.5 closed the gap and is competitive on isolated algorithmic problems; Llama 4 Maverick if you need open-weight or self-hosting.
Best AI for research and multimodal
Gemini 3.1 Pro for image, voice, or video reasoning and for source-grounded research with native Google Search. ChatGPT Deep Research is the close second.
Best AI for long context (500K+ tokens)
Gemini 2.5 Pro (2M tokens) is the largest. Gemini 3.1 Pro and Claude Opus 4.7 extended both fit 1M. Llama 4 also fits 1M and costs less if you self-host.
Cheapest AI API
Gemini 3 Flash at $0.075/$0.30 per 1M tokens, then Llama 4 Scout. For flagship-tier work, Gemini 2.5 Pro ($1.25/$5) is the cheapest full-quality option.
Use it from inside Claude or Cursor
The picker also ships as an MCP server, so Claude Desktop, Cursor, or any MCP-compatible client can call pick_ai_model programmatically. Useful when you're already deep in a chat and want a model recommendation without leaving the tab.
- · npm package:
briskly-mcp-ai-model-picker - · three tools:
pick_ai_model,list_ai_models,get_ai_model - · same decision engine as this page
- · source: /guides/mcp-server-primer for the install pattern
When the picker is the wrong tool
If you already know what you want, the picker is overkill. Use the LLM token counter for cost math on a specific prompt. Read the full Claude vs ChatGPT vs Gemini comparison if you want the deep argument behind the rankings. Read the pricing breakdown if cost is the deciding factor.
The picker is for the case where you're not sure where to start. It gives you a sensible default plus two alternatives in 30 seconds, you decide from there.
FAQ
Which AI model should I use in 2026?
It depends on what you're doing. For writing and agentic coding, Claude Opus 4.7 leads third-party evals. For multimodal (image/voice/video) and consumer features, GPT-5.5 (ChatGPT) is the strongest pick. For long context (over 500K tokens) and cost-sensitive API work, Gemini 3.1 Pro and Gemini 2.5 Pro win. For high-volume or self-hosted, Llama 4 Maverick is the best open-weight option. Run the picker above for a recommendation tuned to your specific situation.
Is Claude better than ChatGPT?
For sustained writing, agentic coding, and document-heavy work, yes, by a measurable margin in third-party evaluations. For image generation, voice mode, and the broader consumer ecosystem (Operator, Canvas, plugins), ChatGPT (GPT-5.5) is ahead. On general chat with no specific use case, they're indistinguishable to most users. The picker factors this in via the 'use case' question.
Which AI is best for coding?
Claude Opus 4.7 leads SWE-bench Verified, Aider polyglot, and Terminal-Bench through 2026 and is the default in Cursor, Claude Code, and Zed. GPT-5.5 closed the gap on agentic coding (82.7% on Terminal-Bench 2.0) and is competitive for new agentic stacks. Llama 4 Maverick is competitive at a fraction of the cost if you can self-host. For pure algorithmic snippets where context doesn't matter, GPT-5.4 (mid-tier OpenAI) is a strong cheap pick.
Which AI has the largest context window?
Gemini 2.5 Pro at 2 million tokens, the largest in production. Gemini 3.1 Pro and Claude Opus 4.7 (extended) sit at 1M tokens. Llama 4 (both Scout and Maverick) at 1M. GPT-5.5 caps at 272K. For whole-codebase reads or massive contracts, Gemini's context lead is the deciding factor.
Which AI is cheapest for API use?
Gemini 3 Flash at $0.075 input / $0.30 output per 1M tokens, then Llama 4 Scout at roughly the same on hosted providers. Among flagship-tier models, Gemini 2.5 Pro ($1.25/$5) is the cheapest, followed by Gemini 3.1 Pro ($2/$12). Claude Opus 4.7 and GPT-5.5 are the most expensive flagships at $5 input each. The 'optimizing API cost' answer in the picker biases toward the cheap end.
What's the best free AI?
Gemini's free tier is the most generous, daily-quota access to Gemini 3.1 Pro on AI Studio with no credit card. ChatGPT and Claude offer free tiers too but with smaller quotas. If you're testing before paying, all three are viable; Gemini gives you the most calls per day at the highest quality tier.
Should I pick one AI or use multiple?
For solo users on consumer plans, one subscription is usually right, decision fatigue is real and most models are good enough for most tasks. For developers building products, mix providers, the cost and capability spread is wide enough that picking the best fit per workload saves real money. The picker recommends one primary + two alternatives precisely because most people benefit from a primary plus one or two backups.
How accurate are the recommendations?
The decision logic is rules-based, not LLM-generated. Each model is scored against your answers (use case, access, context size, budget, provider preference) and the highest score wins. Pricing and benchmark data are updated when providers change them (current as of May 2026). The picker is a sensible-default heuristic, not an oracle, if you're between two close picks, the alternatives section is worth reading.