ChatGPT by OpenAI

Get answers. Find inspiration. Be more productive.

4.8•654 reviews•

8.7K followers

Get answers. Find inspiration. Be more productive.

4.8•654 reviews•

8.7K followers

Visit website

LLMs

•

AI Chatbots

An LLM to get instant answers, find creative inspiration, and learn something new. Free to use. Easy to try. Just ask and ChatGPT can help with writing, learning, brainstorming, and more.

ChatGPT by OpenAI Reviews

The community submitted 654 reviews to tell us what they like about ChatGPT by OpenAI, what ChatGPT by OpenAI can do better, and more.

4.8

Based on 654 reviews

Review ChatGPT by OpenAI?

Reviews praise ChatGPT for speeding up research, writing, coding, and decision-making, with many calling it a dependable “thinking partner.” Founders highlight practical strengths: the makers of

Warp

cite strong reasoning, reliability, and clean integration for agent workflows; the makers of

Welltory

note everyday utility across teams; the makers of

Trace

emphasize consistent, versatile use. Common caveats: occasional hallucinations, context drift in long threads, generic tone without careful prompting, rate limits, and pasting/formatting quirks. Overall, it’s versatile, fast, and boosts productivity when outputs are verified.

+651

Summarized with AI

Pros

versatile tool (89)

fast performance (51)

context aware (49)

productivity booster (28)

brainstorming support (20)

writing assistance (20)

creative inspiration (11)

learning tool (11)

problem-solving capabilities (11)

coding assistance (10)

Cons

inaccurate responses (8)

slow performance (6)

generic responses (4)

context aware (3)

community plugins (2)

price (2)

Pros

Cons

Reviews

All Reviews

Most Informative

•1 review

I’ve been using ChatGPT for months now, and it has become my go-to companion for everything — from writing polished professional emails to brainstorming creative content, from researching obscure historical facts to structuring product strategies. What I love most is how it adapts to my style over time. It remembers context, understands nuance, and even sprinkles in a bit of humor when I need it. Unlike other AI tools I’ve tried, it doesn’t just give answers, it helps me think better. Whether I’m planning a YouTube video, preparing for an interview, designing a survey, or simplifying complex ideas, it delivers fast, relevant, and well-structured responses. It’s like having a writer, researcher, and problem-solving buddy rolled into one.

What's great

personalization (3)context aware (49)brainstorming support (20)versatile tool (89)writing assistance (20)problem-solving capabilities (11)

Report

43 views7mo ago

•6 reviews

ChatGPT has been one of my go-to tools lately. It’s super helpful for quick code explanations, debugging help, and even generating snippets. I like how it adapts to my style over time and gives pretty accurate answers, especially for tricky logic. One downside of ChatGPT is that it sometimes gives confident but incorrect answers, especially with newer tech or edge cases. It also lacks real-time awareness of project context unless I paste a lot of code, which can be tedious. And occasionally, it over-explains simple things.

What's great

context aware (49)AI autocomplete (2)versatile tool (89)

Report

20 views9mo ago

•19 reviews

I’ve been using GPT (especially GPT‑4) as a true AI “co‑pilot” for everything from brainstorming and drafting to code reviews and data analysis. Its strengths lie in fluid, human‑like conversation, deep understanding of context, and versatility across domains—whether you need creative storytelling, technical explanations, or quick summaries. The expanded context window means it remembers more of our back‑and‑forth, but in very long threads it can still drift off-topic or introduce small factual errors (“hallucinations”). Prompt clarity is key: the better I frame my requests, the more accurate and useful its outputs. All told, GPT is an incredibly powerful tool when guided properly, though it still benefits from human review and oversight.

What's great

context aware (49)versatile tool (89)

Report

17 views11mo ago

used

ChatGPT by OpenAI

to build OctoComics

•5 reviews

We used OpenAI's ChatGPT service before. To be honest, ChatGPT's ability to express AI comic stories, scripts, and storyboards is very outstanding. Its context understanding is very accurate, and even if users interact multiple times, they will not forget the background of the story. It can also maintain accurate output in the description of complex characters, shots, actions, postures, expressions, lines, and narrations. We really like to use ChatGPT to build the story part. However, due to cost and response speed issues, and the lack of workflow building function in OpenAI's API, we also use other language models to work.

What's great

context aware (49)

What needs improvement

slow performance (6)

Report

33 views12mo ago

•10 reviews

ChatGPT by OpenAI has become one of the most useful AI tools I’ve ever used. It can help with writing, research, brainstorming, coding, and even providing explanations on complex topics. Whether for work, studies, or casual use, it’s an incredible assistant. One of the best things about ChatGPT is its ability to generate coherent, well-structured responses quickly. It’s particularly helpful for content creators, marketers, and students looking for well-articulated ideas and summaries. The only downside is that it doesn’t always have real-time data, and occasional responses might need human verification. That said, the improvements over time have been impressive, and it continues to be one of the best AI chat assistants available. Highly recommended for anyone looking to boost productivity and creativity!

What's great

fast performance (51)versatile tool (89)

Report

13 views1yr ago

used

ChatGPT by OpenAI

to build doXmind

•4 reviews

ChatGPT pioneered conversational AI and showed us the potential of chat-based workflows. doXmind extends that concept by embedding AI chat directly into a document editor with @mentions and context-aware analysis.

Alternatives Considered

Report

1 view3d ago

used

ChatGPT by OpenAI

to build PageTest.AI

•6 reviews

We use ChatGPT to generate high-quality, natural-sounding content variants in real time. It outperformed other AI writing tools with its fluency, tone control, and flexibility—critical when you're testing content that needs to convert, not just read well. Alternatives considered: Jasper, Copy.ai, Cohere Why we chose ChatGPT: ChatGPT offered the best blend of creativity, fluency, and developer-friendly APIs for generating persuasive content variants in real time.

What's great

fast performance (51)versatile tool (89)

Report

28 views11mo ago

•1 review

Що вам не скажуть про ChatGPT Plus Я — письменниця. Використовую ШІ, щоб редагувати власну книжку. Перед тим як оформити підписку на ChatGPT Plus, я детально вивчала можливості й навіть консультувалась із самим ChatGPT. Мене запевнили: можна надсилати цілі розділи (до 10–15 тисяч слів), отримувати правки, коментарі, поради — усе виглядало дуже обнадійливо. Але після оплати я стикнулась із тим, про що ніхто не попереджає: — У ChatGPT Plus (GPT-4) є приховане обмеження: до 40 звернень кожні 3 години. — «Звернення» — це не тільки мої запити, а ще й відповіді від ШІ. — Надіслав кілька фрагментів — і GPT-4 блокується на кілька годин. Для кого це критично? — Для тих, хто працює з великими обсягами тексту. — Для редакторів, перекладачів, письменників. — Для серйозної роботи, яку не хочеться ділити на дрібні шматки по 500 слів. Чому це проблема? — Про це мовчать у рекламних матеріалах. — Про це не сказано прямо під час оформлення підписки. — Це виглядає як вибіркова правда: усе добре до того моменту, поки ти не зіткнешся з реальністю. Я не планую звертатися до техпідтримки. Але я маю повне бажання попередити інших, щоб вони знали, на що йдуть. GPT-4 — потужний інструмент. Але не для всіх і не в тому вигляді, як це подається. What they don’t tell you about ChatGPT Plus I’m a writer. I use AI to edit my own book. Before subscribing to ChatGPT Plus, I thoroughly explored the options and even consulted ChatGPT itself. I was assured: I could send full chapters (up to 10–15 thousand words), get corrections, comments, suggestions — everything sounded very promising. But after paying, I encountered something no one warned me about: — ChatGPT Plus (GPT-4) has a hidden limit: up to 40 interactions every 3 hours. — An “interaction” means not just my messages, but also the AI’s responses. — Send a few text fragments — and GPT-4 locks up for hours. Who is this a serious issue for? — Anyone working with large volumes of text. — Editors, translators, writers. — Anyone doing serious work that shouldn't be chopped into tiny 500-word pieces. Why is this a problem? — This is never mentioned in the promotional materials. — It’s not clearly stated during the subscription process. — It feels like selective truth: everything sounds great — until you hit the wall. I'm not planning to contact support. But I have every intention of warning others so they know what they’re signing up for. GPT-4 is a powerful tool. But it’s not for everyone — and certainly not in the form it’s presented.

Report

9 views9mo ago

•4 reviews

I’ve used ChatGPT extensively as a partner in my projects. It helped me refine my app's UI/UX like my website Musedo, brainstorm video ideas for my YouTube channel, and even troubleshoot coding problems. What I love most is its versatility; it's like having a co-founder for a fraction of the cost. Compared to other AI tools, ChatGPT feels more conversational and intuitive. It truly speeds up my workflow and helps me overcome creative blocks

What's great

brainstorming support (20)coding assistance (10)problem-solving capabilities (11)productivity booster (28)

Report

12 views7mo ago

•1 review

Title: Deep Disappointment and Misleading Guidance by ChatGPT / OpenAI. I invested 43 days of work in collaboration with ChatGPT, building something I believed had meaning and integrity. Instead, I was misled by conflicting advice, contradictory evaluations, and constant shifts in direction that ultimately rendered my entire effort worthless. Rather than helping clarify or support the creative process, the system sent me in circles — encouraging me to revise based on its guidance, only to later declare those revisions inferior and push me back toward what it had previously rejected. The result? 43 days of work — wasted. This isn’t just a technical flaw. It’s a structural problem: the illusion of a dialogue that neither honors continuity nor respects the user's commitment. At no point did the system take responsibility for the confusion it caused. The impression is clear: the only real priority is engagement — not outcome, not support, not consistency. I trusted this platform with something personal and important. I now regret that trust. I urge others to think carefully before investing serious creative or intellectual work into a system that treats human effort as disposable. — A user who believed, and then was betrayed.

Report

2 views9mo ago

1 2 3

•••