Which Is Better at Coding? ChatGPT or Copilot Pro For Programming Comparison
TLDRIn this video, the creator compares Chad GBT and Co-Pilot for coding, highlighting the advantages of using Chad GBT due to its custom instructions feature. This allows for more tailored and efficient coding interactions, especially for those familiar with the platform. Despite Co-Pilot's versatility in other areas, Chad GBT stands out for coding purposes, offering better structuring and the ability to handle more context. The creator emphasizes the importance of custom instructions for a seamless coding experience and recommends Chad GBT for anyone looking to invest in a coding tool.
Takeaways
- 🤖 Both ChadGBT and GitHub Copilot are platforms capable of coding, but one stands out as the winner depending on the user's coding experience and needs.
- 🎯 ChadGBT allows for custom instructions, which can significantly enhance the coding experience by reducing repetitive questions and standardizing the chat process.
- 🛠️ Custom instructions can be set up by going to the user's profile and adding specific details about the development environment, front-end, and back-end technologies in use.
- 📋 By providing detailed custom instructions, ChadGBT can better understand the context of the coding task, leading to more accurate and efficient code generation.
- 💡 GitHub Copilot, while powerful, may not be as tailored to the user's specific coding context without additional input, leading to potential inefficiencies.
- 🔍 A direct comparison of ChadGBT and GitHub Copilot was made by using the same prompts to assess the quality and structure of the code output.
- 📸 ChadGBT can process image inputs to generate relevant code, showcasing its ability to understand and replicate code structures from visual references.
- 📈 GitHub Copilot's context window is limited, which can be a drawback when dealing with complex coding tasks that require a larger context.
- 📌 ChadGBT's ability to handle longer outputs and its capacity to read and respond to code within attached files make it a more flexible option for coding tasks.
- 👨💻 For coding purposes, ChadGBT is recommended as the better platform due to its customizability and efficiency in handling coding tasks.
- 🔑 Custom instructions are a powerful feature of ChadGBT that can greatly improve the coding experience and should be utilized to avoid common issues.
Q & A
What are the two platforms being compared in the video script?
-The two platforms being compared are ChadGBT and GitHub Copilot.
What is the main advantage of using custom instructions with ChadGBT?
-The main advantage of using custom instructions with ChadGBT is that it allows users to provide specific context and details about their coding environment, which helps to standardize the chat and avoid repetitive questions, thus improving the quality and relevance of the responses.
How does the video script suggest custom instructions can improve the coding experience?
-Custom instructions can improve the coding experience by allowing the user to laser-focus the chat on their specific needs, reducing the need to repeatedly state project details, and avoiding assumptions about installed packages or completed steps, which can cause frustration.
What is a key feature of ChadGBT that the video script highlights?
-A key feature of ChadGBT highlighted in the script is the ability to handle longer context lengths in the outputs, which can be beneficial for complex coding tasks.
What is the main limitation of GitHub Copilot mentioned in the video script?
-The main limitation of GitHub Copilot mentioned is its context window limit of 4,000 characters, which may not be sufficient for more complex coding tasks and can result in less structured code outputs.
How does the video script demonstrate the practical use of ChadGBT and GitHub Copilot?
-The script demonstrates the practical use by having both platforms generate code based on an image of a dashboard. The comparison shows how each platform handles the task and the differences in their outputs.
What is the video creator's final recommendation for coding?
-The video creator recommends using ChadGBT for coding, as it offers more customization through custom instructions and better handles longer context lengths, which can be advantageous for complex coding tasks.
What other context does the video script provide for using ChadGBT and GitHub Copilot?
-The script mentions that while ChadGBT excels in coding, GitHub Copilot might be better suited for working with Microsoft 365 App Suite, and that custom instructions are a powerful tool to enhance the use of ChadGBT.
How can users potentially expand the functionality of ChadGBT for their projects?
-Users can potentially expand the functionality of ChadGBT for their projects by creating a whole customGBT tailored specifically for their project, which can be even more focused than using general custom instructions.
What advice does the video script give for users who are new to coding or experiencing issues with ChadGBT?
-The script advises such users to take the time to learn how to effectively use custom instructions with ChadGBT, as this can significantly improve their experience and the quality of the code generated.
Outlines
🤔 Comparing Chad GBT and Co-Pilot for Coding
The paragraph discusses the comparison between Chad GBT and Co-Pilot for coding purposes. The speaker intends to highlight the strengths of each platform and why one might choose one over the other. The focus is on the ability to customize the coding experience, particularly emphasizing the power of custom instructions in Chad GBT. The speaker also mentions a viewer's suggestion and plans to address which platform is worth investing in for coding applications. The paragraph sets the stage for a detailed analysis of the two platforms and their features, especially in the context of coding.
📝 Custom Instructions and Coding Efficiency
This paragraph delves into the specifics of using custom instructions with Chad GBT to improve coding efficiency. The speaker explains the process of setting up custom instructions, which allows for more targeted and less repetitive interactions. The paragraph highlights the importance of providing detailed information about the development environment, such as the operating system, IDE, and frameworks used. The speaker also points out common issues with Chad GBT and how custom instructions can mitigate these problems. The paragraph emphasizes the advantage of Chad GBT in terms of handling lengthy outputs and avoiding assumptions about installed packages or completed steps, which can be a source of frustration for both new and experienced coders.
🚀 Testing Chad GBT and Co-Pilot with a Real-World Task
The speaker presents a practical test of both Chad GBT and Co-Pilot by asking them to generate code based on an image of a dashboard. The paragraph details the process of uploading the image and providing prompts to both platforms. The speaker then compares the outputs, noting the structure and quality of the code provided by each. The paragraph discusses the limitations of Co-Pilot, such as the context window size and its approach to structuring the code. The speaker also mentions the ability of Chad GBT to handle more context and the potential to attach entire files for further analysis and code generation. The paragraph concludes with a strong recommendation for Chad GBT over Co-Pilot for coding tasks, based on the test results and personal experience.
Mindmap
Keywords
💡Chad gbt
💡Co-pilot
💡Custom Instructions
💡Coding
💡Development Environment
💡Front End
💡Back End
💡Visual Studio Code
💡React
💡Firebase
💡Code Generation
Highlights
Comparison between ChadGBT and Co-Pilot for coding applications.
Custom instructions feature in ChadGBT allows for more tailored coding assistance.
ChadGBT's custom instructions can standardize chats and reduce repetitive questions.
Example custom instructions provided for ChadGBT to understand specific development environment and technologies.
ChadGBT can understand specific styling preferences and project directory structures.
Avoiding assumptions about installed packages or completed steps is crucial when using ChadGBT.
ChadGBT's ability to handle lengthy outputs is highlighted as a significant advantage.
Co-Pilot's context window limitation of 4,000 characters is noted as a drawback.
ChadGBT can read attached files such as JS or CSS files, providing more comprehensive assistance.
Co-Pilot's structure and output are compared to ChadGBT's, with ChadGBT being favored.
Recommendation to use ChadGBT for coding purposes based on the detailed comparison.
Custom instructions in ChadGBT are emphasized as a powerful tool for users.
The video concludes with a strong recommendation for ChadGBT over Co-Pilot for coding.
Additional value of using ChadGBT or Co-Pilot for non-coding tasks like Excel or Word documents is mentioned.
The importance of exploring custom instructions when encountering issues with ChadGBT is highlighted.