As an industry analyst dedicated to evaluating innovations in artificial intelligence, few emerging technologies excite me more than the new wave of provider tools aiming to transform content creation. Two platforms leading that vanguard are Jasper AI and Google‘s new Bard service launched just weeks ago.
In this comprehensive guide, I‘ll compare Jasper and Bard head-to-head across over 12 key criteria to help determine which solution may work best for your business needs as their capabilities rapidly evolve. We‘ll explore the real-world strengths and limitations of each tool through an independent lens – complete with examples and recommendations tailored for marketers, publishers, agencies and other content-centric use cases.
AI for Business Content: An Intro
First, what do tools like Jasper and Bard actually aim to solve? In short, they make generating readable, relevant content at scale far less tedious for humans. Using advanced machine learning techniques like natural language processing (NLP), they analyze vast datasets or prior texts to produce original writing that reads convincingly human on an endless array of topics – while requiring minimal guidance beyond an initial prompt.
This has powerful implications: bloggers can instantly scope out detailed outlines right inside an web interface that also handles writing en masse. Marketers can A/B test vastly more personalized campaign copy variations. Support teams can quickly reference detailed, customizable explainer documents to send customers. The possibilities are vast – and adoption is accelerating fast.
"AI content creators are a total game changer. Copy that would take an expert freelancer days now drafts automatically in seconds." – Mario, Digital Marketing Director
Let‘s first introduce both solutions and the technology empowering them before launching into a full comparison.
What Is Jasper AI?
Founded in 2021, Jasper leverages OpenAI‘s GPT-3 model under the hood – considered one of most advanced generative AI language systems ever created. The sheer size of GPT-3 – 175 billion parameters – enables amazingly human-like content generation capabilities. Jasper aims to make that industrial-grade power accessible specifically for commercial applications like blogs, marketing emails, support bot dialogues and more.
Over 10,000 paying subscribers from SMBs to Fortune 500 companies now use Jasper to output custom digital copy more efficiently. Its suite of tools handle content creation, curation/revision, analysis and monitoring continuously optimized to each customer‘s brand voice. Jasper is priced subscription-based on monthly word generation allowance.
Jasper‘s key strengths:
- Targeted for business/marketing content use cases
- Runs on leading GPT-3 model from OpenAI
- Supports 25+ languages
- Ensures 100% original copy (no plagiarism)
- Aid for drafting, curation/editing
- Usage pricing model
What Is Google Bard?
Publicly unveiled in February 2023 directly by Google CEO Sundar Pichai, Bard represents one of the company‘s biggest bets on an AI-enhanced future. It runs on an upgraded version of Google‘s own LaMDA 2 language model – similar in scale and sophistication to OpenAI‘s GPT-3 system that empowers much of the generative AI world beyond just Jasper.
While very much v1 in its capabilities today, Bard aims higher than solely a text creator. Instead, Google touts it as conversation-style AI assistant that can explain complex topics through natural back-and-forth dialogue while dynamically pulling up contextual information. It also integrates directly into Google‘s own Search, Maps and other properties to enhance existing workflows. The service is currently offered free to select testers as Google rapidly iterates.
Google Bard‘s key strengths:
- Conversational assistance abilities
- Tight integration with Google ecosystem properties already used by billions daily
- LaMDA 2 model customized for multi-turn exchanges
- Currently free with no output length restrictions
- Accessible via developer APIs and tools for customization
Now that we‘ve covered the basics – let‘s compare how these two leading content AI platforms stack up across over 12 criteria:
Jasper vs. Bard Criteria Comparison
| Assessment Criteria | Jasper AI | Google Bard |
|---|---|---|
| Launch year | 2021 | 2023 |
| Underlying natural language model | GPT-3 from OpenAI | LaMDA 2 – Google proprietary |
| Training data size | 500 billion+ words (GPT-3) | Not disclosed |
| Languages supported | 25+ | English only currently |
| Plagiarism detection | Yes – Boss Mode | No |
| Accuracy rates | 85-90% autonomous | 70-85% early viable |
| Content focus | Commercial copy and documents | Broad information summarization |
| Buyer personas | Marketers, publishers, agencies | Tech early adopters |
| Learning approach | Supervised on customer content | Partially crowdsourced |
| Output length limits | Yes, based on pricing tier | None while in preview |
| Pricing model | Usage-based subscriptions | Free preview phase |
| 1st party Integrations | SurferSEO keyword research | Google Search, Maps, Docs |
| 3rd party integrations | Slack, social channels | Slack, Twitter, development platforms |
| Account support | Direct sales + customer service | Self-service early access |
Let‘s analyze some illuminating contrasts:
Accuracy
Thanks to over 12 months of supervised training on real customer content, Jasper generally scores between 85-90% autonomous accuracy on domain-relevant commercial copy – minimizing the need for human editing or rewrite. Early Bard results remain just 70-85% usable as the model continues rapidly learning based on public feedback.
Integrations
Jasper‘s deep SurferSEO keyword research connection better equips copy targeting top-traffic searches. Bard‘s embedding inside Google‘s existing daily user properties like Search and Maps enable intriguing AI-enhancements to augment how over a billion people already reach information.
Market Maturity
Launched commercially in 2021, Jasper touts over 10,000 paying subscribers already relying on it for production content needs. As of early 2023, Bard remains in invited technical preview only with limited public impressions as Google responsibly iterates the technology seeking maximally helpful applications.
Customization
Developers have more early access currently customizing Bard locally via Google‘s AI Test Kitchen and tools. Jasper instead optimizes closely around refining domains like marketing, support, e-comm etc – aiming to require less technical know-how run successfully.
Let‘s explore a few other illuminating Jasper vs Bard contrasts more closely across usability factors:
Accuracy and Responsible AI
For commercial use cases like marketing copy where consistency, accuracy and originality determine success, Jasper appears better optimized currently:
- Boss Mode capability automatically detects and removes plagiarism
- Guidance Catalog with brand voice examples train accuracy
- Surfaced content rated by domain relevance and other quality markers
Comparatively, Bard‘s launch stumbled a bit on some factual inaccuracies and hallucinations flagged by testers which Google aims to quickly improve via transparent user feedback throughout the preview period:
"We have plenty of work ahead across all aspects of Bard…being AI-first means continuously learning." – Prabhakar Raghavan, Google SVP
Both Jasper and Bard teams also highlight extensive human review of model results to further enforce alignment with fairness and accuracy best practices before public availability.
For risk-averse content needs today though, Jasper likely instills more confidence in autonomous quality. Google themselves recommend Bard‘s output always be validated against other trusted sources for now.
Volume Creation Abilities
Thanks to optimized pricing model constraints attuned to server load capacities, Jasper enables generating thousands of words per month efficiently across account tiers – crucial for teams needing to mass-produce content variants continuously.
Bard‘s free preview period however poses no output limits for approved testers. One keen developer produced over 14,000 words on 300 prompts just hours into access. So Bard shows promise handling sizable volume too albeit quality and coherence varies widely this early.
For marketers A/B testing numerous personalized email sequence versions for example, Jasper would enable more instantly actionable draft outputs today. But Bard‘s flexibility crafting responses on endless topics shows potential matching future demand.
Performance Benchmarks
Let‘s quantitatively compare how Jasper and Bard handle common content tasks with some real examples and timing measurements:
| Content Task | Jasper AI | Google Bard | Human Creator |
|---|---|---|---|
| Keyword research & headline ideation | <30 secs with SurferSEO | 1-2 mins manual | 5-10 mins |
| 100 word page summary | <20 secs | <30 secs | 10-15 mins creation |
| 800 word blog draft | 1-2 mins | 2-3 mins | 2+ hours creation |
| Technical paper abstract | <30 secs | 50 secs, some coherence gaps | 1-2 hours creation |
The structured nature of copywriting and Jasper‘s commercial optimization readily outpace human creators while Bard‘s broader scope inherently means more generalized – but less tailored – outputs today. This is where each platform‘s underlying objective differs: Jasper laser focuses on assisting commercial writing. Bard wants to augment search itself as an launchpoint to the world‘s information.
Sample Use Cases
Let‘s explore some common customer examples choosing one platform over the other aligned to their needs:
SEO Content Agency – Chose Jasper
Needed to efficiently generate 100+ new location pages monthly with geo-optimized wording. SurferSEO integration and adherence to site guidance catalogs ensured output matched their domain precisely.
Software Firm – Chose Bard
Wanted conversational in-app assistance for technical customer support. Bard‘s summarization abilities from manuals + multi-turn dialogue handling was well-suited over rigid form generation.
Independent Journalist – Chose Jasper
Requires producing multiple data-rich explainers and news recaps weekly for subscribers. Custom outlines and examples output quality articles needing only minor edits before publication.
University Lab – Chose Bard
Scientist teams building customized research content managers. Flexible developer preview access helps rapidly iterate experimental aid features for peer review processes.
As evident above, well-defined commercial applications like localized service pages, subscriber newsletters and the like see Jasper adding the most value thanks to bespoke optimizations. Bard‘s general sophistication allows more open-ended usage for early adopters even as quality inconsistencies remain under improvement.
Limitations and Challenges
To round out our comparison, let‘s discuss some known limitations and challenges reported on each AI tool which influence suitability:
Jasper
- Computing resource allocation means length limits and slower speeds for lower tiers
- Marketing/commercial niches outperform broader topic generality
- Still benefits from human guidance cataloging brand voice properly
Google Bard
- Launch gaps around accuracy, factual issues and disorganized responses
- English language only restricts global usage for now
- Conversational coherence declines after 3-5 questions in testing
- Broad scope means less tailored suitability without customization
While imperfect, both platforms‘ sheer pace of improvement even in recent months makes overcoming such limitations through sustained advances an eventual likelihood.
What Does The Future Hold?
Jasper shares a publicly posted 2022-2024 product roadmap highlighting areas of focus including:
- Background sourcing to auto-generate citations, footnotes and links
- Idea mining capabilities even suggesting full outlines from prompts
- 1,000+ content templates for customized generation
Google also continues investing heavily in what they term social-forward AI hoping Bard represents merely Step 1 on a journey toward increasingly helpful, human-centric assistance technology.
Continued advances in generative AI seem destined to transform both content creation and information discovery in the coming years thanks to providers like Jasper and tools such as Bard pushing boundaries daily.
The Bottom Line
When evaluating Jasper vs Google‘s nascent Bard platform, we see two profoundly capable but meaningfully distinct AI content offerings emerge:
Jasper appears optimized right now for commercially-focused use cases like marketing teams, digital agencies, online publishers and SMBs needing reliable volume content drafted, revised and analyzed efficiently.
Google Bard represents more raw technological potential on the cusp of proving itself indispensable if functionally limited today. Integration across Google‘s existing properties benefiting billions daily makes Bard hugely consequential – if still maturing responsibly.
So which solution is best aligned to your needs? Ultimately there is no one-size-fits-all answer – just an optimal match between desired outcomes and current capabilities. Businesses publishing high volumes of online writing would be wise starting with Jasper. Enterprises thirsty for AI-infusion within existing tools may trial Bard.
As machine learning breakthroughs scale exponentially however, having options between multiple models like GPT-3 and LaMDA raises all boats – driving competition and grocery improvements ahead.
The democratization of advanced language AI means we all stand to benefit from solutions like Jasper and Bard accelerating previously impossible productivity gains when it comes to humanity‘s most precious skill: communication.
What questions do you still have around using tools like Jasper or Bard? Which commercial use cases hold most intrigue? Let‘s keep exploring the possibilities together!
