AI content creation tools have become much more accessible and mainstream since the release of ChatGPT and Gemini (previously known as Bard) by Google.

Since then, we have seen an accelerated uptake in the use of AI tools – and especially in AI content generation.

Revisiting an article we wrote pre-ChatGPT, we have reassessed our original list of tools to road-test AI content generators and see how their output compares.

How ChatGPT Is Changing The Content Industry

OpenAI has led the development of large language models and generative AI. In May 2020, GPT-3 was launched, which was a huge leap forward in quality from the predecessor GPT-2.

AI content writers began to improve greatly, and as we reported in the last version of this article, there were several content generator tools that all provided reasonable results.

Then, in November 2022, OpenAI launched ChatGPT and opened up access to GPT-3.5 through an easy-to-access interface.

This resulted in an explosion of interest and uptake in the use of generative AI. By the end of January 2023, ChatGPT had 100 million users and was officially the fastest-growing app in history.

Many of the tools listed below (apart from Gemini) are all based on GPT-3.5 or GPT-4.

Bard (now called Gemini), developed by Google Deepmind, was launched quickly in response to ChatGPT in February 2023.

The other main contender is Claude from Anthropic, launched in March 2023. But, at this time, Claude doesn’t have the mainstream dominance that ChatGPT holds.

Following the introduction of these generative AI tools and their mainstream adoption, there have been plenty of discussions about ethics, the impact on creativity, and the impact on jobs.

In a meta self-referential message, Gemini (Bard) even offers this message in response to the prompt “AI Content Creation.”

The Drawbacks Of Using AI Writers

With easy access to AI content writing tools, the content production industry is changing.

Many websites have adopted AI as a tool for mass production and others are doubling down on the quality of human-written content where AI content generators cannot compare.

Generative AI is causing a lot of disruption in SEO and content creation. In reaction to this, there has been pushback from businesses that this could impact – such as the NYT suing Open AI for training its LLM on their content without approval.

What this means is that, right now, there are unresolved issues of fair use, copyright, privacy, security, and bias. It could result in a dispute over the ownership and copyright of AI-generated content.

There are many legal and ethical issues arising, including the impact on creativity and the jobs it might displace.

At SEJ, we consider generative AI a useful tool to support content writers and SEO professionals but not a replacement for human content writers (see use cases at the end of the article).

Apart from these problems, generative AI also has the following disadvantages:

• Hallucinations and misinformation. Unless you understand your topic in-depth, you won’t know what you don’t know and cannot take the output from a chatbot for written facts.
• Writing style can be unnatural, with an unusual choice of words that is jarring to read.
• Getting the best results takes considerable skill and understanding of writing and using prompts.

Another major flaw is that if everyone is using an AI tool to target the same keywords, then where is the differentiating factor to what you are creating?

What will make your brand stand out and resonate with your audience?

For these reasons, SEJ recommends that you do not use generative AI to create content that you intend to publish. 

How You Can Use AI In Content Marketing

A tool is only as good as the person operating it.

Generative AI can be excellent for productivity and speeding up content production. But, you need someone who knows their subject and is a good writer behind the wheel to get results worthy of using.

A content marketer can truly benefit from generative AI as an efficient tool to make repetitive tasks easier and output faster. In those terms, the use of all kinds of AI will become more and more seamlessly integrated into marketing.

Here are some quick use-case examples specific to content creation and whether generative AI works or doesn’t.

Where AI Content Does Work (with human review):

• For product descriptions at scale.
• For meta descriptions at scale.
• To support a writer’s productivity:
  • Creating summaries or key points of content.
  • Assisting with brainstorming and idea generation.
  • Creating outlines for content.
  • Improving headlines

Where AI Content Doesn’t Work:

• Producing well-researched content.
• Creating data-driven content.
• Having innovative and fresh ideas.
• Thought leadership.
• Writing full articles.
• Providing sources or facts.

In this article, we will review a selection of the current best content creation tools to see how they compare for illustrative purposes. Even though there are many use cases we don’t suggest, it wouldn’t be prudent to bury our heads in the sand about their capabilities. Let’s look at the results of the tools we tested:

10 AI Content Creation Tools Compared

All the content generator tools we tested were fed the same simple phrase: ‘AI content creation.’

We compared the use of the tool and the quality of the content output. You can see that output in each of the screenshots below.

As part of the comparison, we also ran all the content through Copyscape to check for plagiarism.

What has become apparent in the last few years since the previous version of this article is that ChatGPT and Gemini are set to dominate. Because of this, other AI writing tools will have to offer much more to differentiate and compete against them.

For the purposes of this article, we only tested tools that had a free option available. This list of AI writers is simply a selection of the most popular tools on the market and not our personal recommendation, nor a fully inclusive list of all tools available in the market.

1. ChatGPT

Screenshot from ChatGPT, January 2024

ChatGPT is built on GPT-3.5 for free users and GPT-4 for paying subscribers.

ChatGPT is the tool that many of the other AI writers in this list are built on (apart from Gemini) and offers an easy-to-access interface to the powerful GPT LLMs.

The applications of ChatGPT go far beyond just content creation, with its use case experiments being documented almost daily. Learning how to write prompts has become one of the most in-demand skills in the last year.

ChatGPT also has GPTs which are plugin tools that can complete set tasks. A bit like templates or extensions for Sheets or add-ons for Chrome – expect this to become a fast-developing area.

Out of the box, ChatGPT appears easy to use, but the challenge is writing specific and tailored prompts to get the best results.

However, simply typing in “AI content creation” did generate 338 words of a comprehensive description that could be the basis of a human-written article.

The free version is an excellent starting point, and the premium Plus version allows access to the additional tools.

OpenAI provides ChatGPT in varied pricing tiers: ChatGPT Plus at $20/month for individuals, ChatGPT Team at $25 per person/month for teams, and a customizable ChatGPT Enterprise plan for larger organizational needs.

• Ability to engage in detailed and context-aware conversations.
• Accessible and easy to use.

2. Gemini (previously Bard)

Screenshot from Bard, January 2024

Gemini (Bard), by Google Deepmind, is a Large Language Model tool built on the Gemini platform. Much the same as ChatGPT, Gemini is an infinitely powerful tool that has exponential applications.

The potential applications for content producers as a tool to help with content creation are endless. We expect that, between ChatGPT and Gemini, most SEO professionals and content creators will use one of these tools daily.

Gemini is very easy to use with the minimalist interface you would expect from Google.

In output terms, Gemini has different nuances to ChatGPT, as you would expect, built on different models. Using each of the tools on a regular basis highlights where each differs and excels to get the best results.

The output from Gemini is sometimes better than ChatGPT – or just different. However, information can be disjointed, and all information must be fact-checked, as both tools have a tendency to make things up with hallucinations.

One important point to note was that Gemini did flag two results in our Copyscape plagiarism check. ChatGPT did not flag any.

Gemini is available as a free version and Gemini Advance is priced at $19.99 per month just undercutting ChatGPT.

• Provides real-time online access
• Available in 46 languages.

3. Writesonic

Screenshot from Writesonic, January 2024

Writesonic is built on GPT-4 and is based on facilitating marketing copy, blog articles, and product descriptions. The generator can also provide content ideas and outlines, and has a full suite of templates for different types of content.

Writesonic has a variety of different tools for different purposes, but on the free trial, we didn’t have access to most of them.

We tested the article writing tool, and it was very easy to use. The article read well, but please remember all of the caveats above. This is an interesting test of the tool’s capabilities, but we don’t suggest directly publishing the outputs of generative AI, and it’s our internal policy not to do so.

Writesonic’s unique selling points include integrating with Google Search for more up-to-date content and providing sources.

The platform offers a free version with basic features, while paid plans range from $13 to $500 monthly. Enterprise solutions are available with customized pricing to fit the needs of larger organizations.

• Features designed for SEO optimization.
• Support for creating content in 30 different languages.
• API access, bulk processing, and integrations for scalability and efficiency.

4. Copy.ai

Screenshot from Copy.ai, January 2024

Copy.ai is an AI-driven platform that claims to automate various sales and marketing tasks, from cold outreach to content repurposing.

Copy.ai provides templates across a variety of content types, such as blogs, ads, sales, websites, and social media. The generator also provides translation into 25 languages.

Copy.ai differentiates by offering a zero-retention data policy, claiming that user inputs are never retained or used for training purposes, which could be crucial for privacy-conscious organizations. It says it only works with language models that adhere to this strict data policy.

From the three-word phrase input, the tool produced a long article about the subject without any additional prompting.

The quality was good, and we found that it would be difficult to discern that this was machine-generated. The output appears to have improved since we tested it last. Again, this doesn’t change the fact that writing final content outputs is not a use case that we suggest for these tools.

Copy.ai has a free plan, and paid plans range from $36/month for Pro to $3,000/month for Scale.

• Enhanced data privacy.
• 25 languages supported.

5. HyperWrite

Screenshot from HyperWrite, January 2024

HyperWrite is an AI-powered writing tool that claims to assist with creating marketing copy, conducting research, and improving overall writing and communication skills. It offers a Chrome extension for ease of use across various web platforms.

Hyperwriter looks a lot like ChatGPT, and the output returned was very similar to what we achieved directly in ChatGPT. Too similar for coincidence.

It would appear that HyperWrite uses the ChatGPT interface with a simple prompt layered onto the phrase we input. From this test, we don’t see any justification to use this tool over ChatGPT.

Free trial available: Premium plan at $19.99 monthly and Ultra plan at $44.99 monthly.

• Chrome Extension available.

6. Rytr

Screenshot from Rytr, January 2024

Rytr is an AI writing assistant that claims to help users create high-quality content quickly and cost-effectively.

Rytr offers over 40 use cases, support for 30+ languages, and more than 20 tones of voice.

We found the tool very easy to use and quickly generated an output. However, the content was not as well-written as other writers tested, and the language output did not feel natural and was obviously AI-generated.

There were…