If you write long articles, code large projects, or use the internet search, ChatGPT may not feel suitable anymore in 2026. ChatGPT starts to reduce its output length, which makes it hard to generate complete code, even a simple 2000-word article in one go. Plus, some real problems start with its new model 5.2 and internet search features. So, to solve these issues, you can use a new underrated AI: Z.ai.
In this article, we compare Z.ai vs ChatGPT based on long output, web search, thinking mode, and coding, using screenshots and real proof.
1. ChatGPT struggles with long responses
I asked ChatGPT to write a 3000-word article in one go. See what happened next:
It says here that this is your 3000-word article, but that’s not true at all:
And it will keep saying that it’s 3000, the next output is 3000, but that won’t happen until you tell it to split the output into two parts, asking for 1500 words in each part.
Another example of continue problem:
It stopped halfway. Then asked me to continue in the next output:
It again stopped. Even after two attempts, I did not get the full article in one clean flow.
This breaks the writing process. When content comes in parts, the tone changes, examples repeat, and context is often lost. For long guides, tutorials, or blog posts, this becomes a real problem.
The same issue exists even in paid plans like ChatGPT Go. The response length is still controlled. You can continue, but you cannot get a large article in one single output.
Now compare this with z.ai.
On z.ai, I asked for the same. It generated the full article in a single response. No stopping. No continuation prompts. No false word claim:
……
This is the best part of Z.ai, you can generate 10,000 words of code or content in a single go, and it never stops. For writers, bloggers, and students, long output in one go saves time and mental effort. You can review, edit, and publish faster.
2. ChatGPT cannot combine web search and thinking together
This is a small feature, but it creates a big usability issue.
In ChatGPT, you must choose between web search or thinking mode. If you turn on thinking, web search is dropped. If you turn on web search, thinking is off. Try yourself:
For users, this feels confusing. We want the model to search the web and then think deeply about the results. Separating these two makes no sense for real tasks.
In z.ai, this problem does not exist.
z.ai allows internet search and reasoning at the same time. It searches first, understands the information, and then explains it clearly. You do not need to choose between modes.
This makes z.ai feel more natural to use. You focus on the question, not on toggles and settings.
3. ChatGPT reduces costs by removing older models
Another major problem with ChatGPT!
Many users noticed that ChatGPT removed older models and kept only GPT-5.2. On paper, this sounds like progress. But real users shared a different story.
One major reason seems to be cost reduction. Older models like GPT-4o or o3 required more compute power. Running many models at the same time increases infrastructure cost. By removing them, OpenAI can concentrate resources on one main model and reduce expenses. Several users openly pointed this out, saying GPT-5 feels more like a cost-optimised model than a quality upgrade.
Another reason is capacity management. Maintaining multiple models splits computing power. By forcing everyone onto one model, OpenAI can scale faster and handle traffic more easily.
There is also frustration around forced change. Users spent months training prompts, building habits, and shaping responses around older models. Suddenly, those models disappeared. No warning. No opt-out. No simple way to go back.
Some users even reported practical issues after the change. Slower responses, shorter answers, ignored context, or answers cutting off. Earlier models handled these tasks better for them.
In contrast, Z.ai takes a different approach. It allows users to switch between older and newer models. This respects the fact that different tasks need different behavior. Writing, chatting, coding, and reasoning are not the same problem.
Instead of forcing one model for everything, Z.ai lets users decide what works best for them. That small decision removes a lot of frustration and makes the experience feel user-first rather than cost-first.
4. ChatGPT web search problems
Even if ChatGPT doesn’t allow simultaneous thinking and internet searching, it’s still fine, as long as its internet features work well, such as its deep research capabilities, but that is also not working properly after its latest updates.
Since the launch of GPT-5.1 and the ChatGPT Atlas browser in late 2025 or early 2026, many users have observed a significant increase in search-related errors because the model’s new architecture sometimes struggles to switch between internal reasoning and external tool calls, causing the “handshake” with the search engine (Bing) to fail.
Sometimes it worked, but many times it failed with errors like search unavailable, tool failed, etc. This can be fixed soon, but in comparison, Z.ai’s internet search feels smoother and more reliable. You ask a question, and it searches the web without interruptions. There is usually no need to retry the same prompt again and again.
That is why Z.ai vs ChatGPT matters for people who depend on daily web research.
If you are doing content research, fact checking, or trend analysis, reliability matters a lot.
5. Z.ai is better for coding than ChatGPT
Coding is not just about generating snippets. Many times, we want full files, full logic, or complete project structure.
With ChatGPT, large code outputs are often cut in the middle. You need to ask it to continue. Sometimes variable names change. Sometimes context is lost.
With Z.ai, you can generate large code blocks in one response. This is very useful for backend files, APIs, or full scripts.
When combined with internet search, z.ai can also reference updated libraries and patterns, which helps in real projects.
6. Free access: Z.ai vs ChatGPT
Over time, ChatGPT has slowly shifted important features toward paid plans. The free version still works, but is limited. Response length is shorter, advanced features are restricted, and usage limits appear quickly. For full capability, users are encouraged to upgrade.
In contrast, Z.ai chat is absolutely free. You can generate long content in one go, write an entire website.
This does not mean paid tools are bad. Paid plans make sense for many professional users. But having strong features available for free lowers the barrier to actually getting work done.
If we look at the Z.ai vs ChatGPT comparison honestly, the biggest advantage of Z.ai is not just output quality. It is free. That alone makes Z.ai worth trying for many people.
Conclusion
This is not about saying ChatGPT is bad. ChatGPT is powerful and popular for many reasons. But when we look at long output, stable web search, combined thinking, and coding workflow, Z.ai clearly solves some real frustrations.
In the end, the Z.ai vs ChatGPT debate depends on your needs. For long output, internet search, and smoother experience, z.ai currently feels like a better fit for many users.
