If the question is which of the great technology is winning the AI career, the answer is: None

Who is winning the AI race? At this point we should have it more or less clear. We had it when Microsoft and Intel were profiled as the dominators of the PC world or when Apple and Google triumphed with their smartphones. But with AI something curious happens: Things are very even.

Of, done, too much.

Of course, in the field of Openai popularity, it is the most prominent with chatgpt. Recently the company presumed to be touching The 700 million active weekly users, a really remarkable figure that leaves its competitors behind. However, that metric is not definitive, especially when we have a great unknown to elucidate: what is the best AI model?

It is impossible to know today what is the best model of AI

No one can give a clear answer to that question. Neither the companies, which continuously breastfeed with their new versions, nor the benchmarks, which They have become a useful but imperfect tool when evaluating the quality of these models.

That the answer to that question is difficult Polymarket demonstrates itthis unique prediction platform in which users bet on a result and also pay it by voting for one or another conclusion. To the question of “What company does the best model of AI have at the end of August?

Everything seemed to smile at Openai, but after the launch of GPT-5, the Batacazo: now the clear favorite is Gemini, the Google model, with OpenAI collapsed to 16% of the votes and even more behind Grok (XAI) with 6.3% of votes and Claude (Anthropic) with a very low (in my opinion) 1.5%.

It is not that Polymarket is an especially reliable indicator of this (or anything), but it makes it clear that The public perception of these models can be very different of their real behavior in things like their number of users-here OpenAi tombs their competitors-or their performance performance such as Arc-Agi 2 (where Grok 4 wins everyone, including GPT-5).

And that makes us even clearer what are the two great reasons why it is a real problem to know which model of AI is winning this career. The first, that these tests are often very specific and concrete, and focus on evaluating aspects such as the ability to program or solve mathematical problems of these models.

And the second, that The models do not stop improving and to overcome what his rivals had achieved a few days, weeks or months before. We do not stop seeing how new versions of the models are (logically) something better programming, generating text or images or solving certain types of problems, but there is no consensual or definitive form of saying “this model is better.”

As we have seen, each user also has their own personal perception (Hello, Polymarket) when using them. Some prefer Claude to program, other chatgpt for generic questions, other Gemini to talk about diverse topics and to learn, for example. And none seems to be the final model “for everything.”

That leads us to a reflection: that this general artificial intelligence (AGI) is far from arriving. These systems, which are supposed to be overcome in all areas, are not even remotely close to doing so, and They continue to make mistakes even when for example GPT-5 seems to have significantly mitigate the problem of hallucinations. Analysts like Gary Marcus They reminded us These days that have been saying the same thing about 30 years: that with this type of climbing techniques We are not going to get to an AGI And that the road has to be another.

And that leaves us some interesting ideas.

David Sacks – Paypal Cocfounder, founder of Yammer, investor— analyzed The situation of this segment and raised striking conclusions. The five main companies that develop foundational models —Openai, Google, Meta, Anthropic or XAI – still do not master the market, but that is (or it can be) good news.

And it is because there is neither a monopoly nor a duopoly of AI. What there is is a fierce competition not only among these five North American companies, but between them and all their Chinese competitors, to which a lot of startups are added that have no resources to work on foundational models – careful – and instead they try to solve another great question: what is the Killer app of the AI.

That’s where there are great opportunities for these startups, which can solve success cases in which AI can really be a disruption for an industry. It is for example what emerging companies have done such as cursor or Windsurf, which have opted for the vibe coding boom and are capturing a lot of interest among the developer segment.

In fact, every time we see how even the greats of AI presume that their new models program especially well or perhaps are more oriented than ever to solve mathematical problems. GPT-5 precisely use those two arguments to declare themselves better than the competition, and although some benchmarks prove them right, the perception of the users will determine whether they meet expectations or not.

But there is also that great debate between the proprietary models (such as GPT-5) and the Open Source models. As Sacks says, the fact that Open Source models They can offer 80-90% of the capacity with a cost of 10-20% of foundational models is sensational for certain users.

Specifically, for those who prioritize customization, control and cost savings on the use of foundational models. China goes for all with that philosophy, although curiously it was a goal that taught the way – which now seems to have ruled out – and OpenAi He has just taken it as Plan B.

An unsuspected winner of the AI career: Apple

Almost three years have passed since Openai launched Chatgpt, and in all this time we have attended the frantic boom of AI. Promises and expectations have flooded everything, and although these models have proven to be very useful and certainly surprising in some scenarios, the real revolution is not there.

But while it occurs, almost all large technology companies have spent irreverent amounts of money to develop their AI or infrastructure models with which to support the theoretical demand for an avid world to talk with their chatbots.

And yet, all of them are losing money big. The investments still do not be profitable and it is not clear when they will be (if they are once), but there is a big tech that It has remained in a surprising background: Apple.

They may be the ones who decided to lose the train and take it if it finally made sense to do so. They may lose it due to negligence or a calculation error. Be that as it may, Apple does not work in large foundational models or Nor in creating a gigantic network of data centers.

So instead of betting everything on AI, in Apple they remain in a very discreet – and disappointing – background, with a very poor implementation of AI options in their operating systems and with a clear fiasco and delay in the deployment of the new version of Siri.

Instead, Apple seems to trust creating the Killer app of the AI. That which can demonstrate that this technology was a Commodity And what matters was not to have the best foundational model, but in knowing how to apply and take advantage of it.

Cupertino’s company’s approach seems clear: they bet once again for privacy and to be able to execute these models at home. That, conjugated with Tim Cook’s obsession with augmented reality glasses could end up taking a result – a goal Rayban with a lot of AI, but Apple – but today everything is cabals and speculation.

If that is really Apple’s bet, it will have it complicated. Especially since it will not be alone in that area. Google is working on your own augmented reality glasses with AIand of course, goal has been in that battle for some time and is an absolute reference (without forgetting The alliance OpenA-Jony Ive). Chinese technology companies are not going to leave escape your opportunitybut if there is a company that knows how to combine software and hardware in a remarkable way, that is Apple.

Everything is about to see, but what is clear is that today no company is winning the AI race. And there is the exciting.

Image | Xataka with chatgpt

In Xataka | Is Tim Cook the Apple Ballmer and Nadella is the Microsoft Jobs?