Email Generation for Work: GPT-4o vs OpenAI o1-mini

Email Quality: OpenAI o1-mini > GPT-4o

• Both AIs consistently produced grammatically correct, clear, and coherent emails
• OpenAI o1-mini often provided more comprehensive and detailed responses
• OpenAI o1-mini often used more reader-friendly formatting (headings, bullet points)
• Both maintained professional tones appropriate for work contexts

Accuracy and Information Integrity: OpenAI o1-mini ≛ GPT-4o

• Both AIs adhered closely to the provided information without evident fabrication
• No significant issues with hallucinations or made-up facts were observed

Relevance and Customization: OpenAI o1-mini > GPT-4o

• OpenAI o1-mini generally showed superior ability to tailor responses to specific situations
• Both AIs demonstrated good understanding of various email contexts and requirements

Consistency: OpenAI o1-mini ≛ GPT-4o

• Both AIs maintained uniform voice and quality across different email types
• Performance remained consistent regardless of task complexity

User Experience: OpenAI o1-mini ≛ GPT-4o

• Although OpenAI o1-mini takes more time "thinking", the subsequent generation completes quickly, making the overall experience comparable with the slower GPT-4o generation

Authenticity: OpenAI o1-mini ≛ GPT-4o

• Both AIs generated emails that sounded natural and appropriate for work contexts
• No significant issues with artificial-sounding language were detected

Conclusion: OpenAI o1-mini > GPT-4o

While both AIs performed well in generating work-related emails, OpenAI o1-mini frequently demonstrated a slight edge in comprehensiveness, customization, and formatting. Both AIs could produce high-quality, professional emails suitable for various work scenarios, with consistent performance across different email types and complexity levels.