ChatGPT Still Leads AI Chatbots as Gemini and Rivals Narrow the Gap in 2025

OpenAI’s ChatGPT remains the most-used chatbot worldwide, but recent telemetry shows Google’s Gemini and a shifting roster of rivals are steadily chipping away at the incumbent’s once unassailable lead.

Background / Overview​

The generative‑AI landscape in 2025 is no longer a two‑player sprint; it’s a crowded, fast‑moving relay where distribution, multimodality, and product integration matter as much as raw model quality. What began as a competitive duel between early ChatGPT releases and Google’s experimental systems has grown into a multi‑vendor market that includes Gemini, xAI’s Grok, Anthropic’s Claude, Microsoft Copilot, Perplexity, and a number of China‑originated entrants such as DeepSeek and Qwen variants.
Measuring who “wins” depends heavily on what metric you choose. Market share snapshots quoted in recent reporting are drawn from web‑traffic analytics firms and app telemetry; those estimates are directional and subject to methodological differences (referral share, unique visitors, sessions, mobile vs. desktop). This article synthesizes the available telemetry, flags where numbers diverge, and unpacks what these shifts mean for Windows users, IT teams, and platform strategists.

---

The current snapshot: what the numbers say​

As of October 19, one widely circulated tracker reported ChatGPT commanding roughly 74.1% of generative‑AI web traffic, with Gemini in second place at 12.9%, followed by DeepSeek (3.7%), Perplexity (2.4%), Claude (2.0%), and Copilot (1.2%). Those headline figures reflect a meaningful decline for ChatGPT relative to a year earlier and a rapid rise for Gemini in recent months.
At the same time, independent dashboards using different measurement rules have painted slightly different pictures. For example, StatCounter’s mid‑2025 snapshots showed ChatGPT holding in the ~80–83% range for chatbot referral traffic, with rivals substantially behind; that divergence underscores how metric choice (referrals vs. direct visits vs. app in‑use metrics) produces different market narratives. Both snapshots agree on one point: ChatGPT still leads by a large margin, but Gemini and several niche players are growing faster.

Why the numbers differ (short explainer)​

• Different vendors measure different things: referral share, unique visitors, sessions, or API calls.
• Small players show larger percent changes from a smaller base; big incumbents show smaller percentage swings despite larger absolute growth.
• Mobile and in‑app usage can be invisible to web‑centric trackers; firms that integrate with search engines or OS vendors show strong in‑app growth that web analytics may undercount.

---

What’s driving Gemini’s surge​

Google’s growth isn’t primarily a pure‑model story; it’s a product and distribution story. Gemini’s gains have been fueled by:

• Cross‑product integration (Search, Chrome, Workspace, Android and device surfaces) that inserts the assistant into daily workflows.
• Viral multimodal features — notably image editing and short video generation tooling — that drive engagement spikes when shared on social platforms.
• Large context and specialized tooling (agents, long context windows) that attract research and creator use cases.

Google’s ability to push a new capability across billions of Search and Workspace users quickly is a structural advantage that rivals must match either with partnerships, unique features, or superior user experiences. That distribution effect is why Gemini’s growth can look dramatic in short windows even if its absolute share remains far behind ChatGPT.

---

Where challengers are making gains​

Not every competitor needs to be a general‑purpose ChatGPT clone to succeed. Several entrants are growing by focusing on niches or by leveraging distribution advantages:

• Perplexity has carved out a researcher and citation‑centric niche, emphasizing verifiable, web‑sourced answers for users who need traceability. Its steady growth reflects demand for sources and live retrieval.
• DeepSeek experienced a meteoric early‑year rise after a viral global rollout; however, sustaining that momentum has proven difficult as the initial hype cooled and larger vendors rolled out competitive features. DeepSeek’s trajectory highlights how virality can create high peaks but not necessarily durable mainstream adoption.
• xAI’s Grok rode social attention and integration into X, but recent snapshots show a modest retreat in usage, underscoring how moderation, platform policies, and distribution limits shape longevity.
• Anthropic’s Claude and Microsoft Copilot hold steady in enterprise or embedded productivity roles where integration and governance matter more than headline traffic. Their steady incremental growth points to enterprise traction rather than consumer virality.

---

How trustworthy are the headline claims?​

Telemetry vendors are transparent about samples and methodology, and scrutiny is warranted for any single hard number. Two practical points for readers:

• Large differences between trackers are normal; treat single‑vendor decimals as directional, not absolute.
• When a tracker reports double‑digit percentage‑point shifts for big incumbents, ask whether the metric is percentage of a tiny slice (e.g., a specific app’s traffic) or global reach; the same percent movement can mean very different things in absolute terms.

Where reporting asserts global "user" totals in the billions, those figures often blend different metrics (cumulative visits, app downloads, or broad feature reach) and should be treated cautiously unless the vendor publishes raw methodology and sampling frames. Several industry analyses have pushed back on some widely circulated multi‑billion "user" claims as being inconsistent with public telemetry.

---

Technical trade‑offs shaping adoption​

Beyond marketing and distribution, three technical axes determine sustained adoption across platforms:

• Multimodality vs latency/cost — models that handle images, video, and long context windows tend to consume more compute and may have higher latency or cost for large‑scale use. Vendors that optimize for fast, cheap responses win on casual tasks; those that prioritize multimodal or deep reasoning win in specialist workflows.
• Safety and moderation — stricter content filters reduce edge‑case hallucinations but can frustrate power users; looser moderation can increase adoption but heighten misuse risk and regulatory scrutiny. Large user bases complicate governance.
• Integration and APIs — platforms that expose robust APIs or plug‑in systems create broader ecosystems; sandboxed, closed interfaces limit developer adoption despite good core model performance. OpenAI’s GPT family has benefited from broad API adoption, while Google’s Gemini benefits from product embedding.

---

What this means for Windows users, IT admins, and enterprises​

For the Windows community and IT teams responsible for desktops, endpoints, and productivity workflows, the generative‑AI market shifts have practical implications:

• Ecosystem fit matters. If your organization is heavily embedded in Microsoft 365 and Windows, Copilot and Microsoft’s integration path may offer the most seamless management story. Conversely, organizations using Google Workspace will find Gemini increasingly compelling as it appears in Gmail, Docs, and Chrome. Neutral platforms like ChatGPT remain attractive for cross‑platform API integration.
• Governance and auditability should be first‑class. Enterprises must insist on contractual data‑handling terms (non‑training clauses where required), retention controls, and SOC‑type compliance to safely adopt large‑scale AI assistants. Vendors vary on enterprise guarantees; evaluate these before broad deployment.
• Human‑in‑the‑loop remains essential. For high‑risk outputs (legal, finance, PHI), automations should include verification steps, logging, and escalation paths. Treat models as productivity amplifiers, not decision authorities.
• Test drive before committing. Run time‑boxed pilots that measure real outcomes (time saved, error rates, escalation frequency) and check for throttling, cost, and unusable hallucinations under real workloads. This pragmatic approach prevents lock‑in to a platform that fails at scale or in edge cases.

---

Security, privacy and regulatory implications​

Large, centralized platforms raise three interlinked concerns:

• Data exposure and training bleed. Consumer tiers often permit aggregated telemetry to be used for model improvement unless explicitly opted out; enterprises should require contractual non‑training guarantees or enterprise‑grade products that segregate data.
• Regulatory scrutiny and antitrust optics. When a vendor bundles AI capabilities across dominant search or productivity products, regulators may scrutinize the distribution model and data‑sharing arrangements. Distribution advantage can be a double‑edged sword: it accelerates adoption while inviting regulatory attention.
• Safety for multimodal features. Image and video editing tools unlock creative possibilities but also lower the barrier for misuse (deepfakes, deceptive edits). Vendors must balance access and protection; organizations deploying these tools must adopt content verification and provenance checks in workflows.

---

Practical playbook for WindowsForum readers​

For power users, IT pros, and administrators planning to adopt or manage assistants, the following checklist condenses best practices:

• Inventory: Catalog where assistants will touch corporate data (emails, docs, code repositories).
• Risk Triage: Classify tasks by sensitivity (public, internal, regulated) and restrict model usage accordingly.
• Pilot: Run a 30–90 day pilot with clearly measured KPIs (time saved, error rate, support tickets generated).
• Governance: Negotiate enterprise terms addressing data use, training opt‑outs, retention, and audit logs.
• Redundancy: Design fallbacks — multi‑vendor strategies or human reviewers — for critical pipelines.
• User Training: Create short guidance for employees on safe prompts, PII handling, and escalation paths.
• Monitor: Track actual usage, cost, latency, and hallucination incidents monthly; adjust contracts or throttles as needed.

This pragmatic sequence protects organizations while enabling them to harvest productivity gains from assistants.

---

Strengths and opportunities: why competition is good​

The emergence of multiple credible assistants offers tangible benefits:

• Faster innovation. Competition accelerates features like multimodal editing, long‑context reasoning, and agentic tooling.
• Better product fit. Different assistants specialize: research accuracy (Perplexity), productivity embedding (Copilot, Gemini), conversational finesse (ChatGPT). This variety lets organizations choose what maps best to their workflows.
• Price and packaging experimentation. New entrants and alternative pricing models (low‑cost tiers, on‑device Nano models) pressure incumbents to refine offerings and may reduce cost for users over time.

---

Risks and open questions​

Despite the optimism, clear risks remain:

• Measurement uncertainty. Public market share snapshots are noisy; decision makers should not over‑react to single‑vendor headlines. Treat month‑to‑month swings as signals, not gospel.
• Sustainability of viral plays. Viral launches can produce short peaks (as seen with DeepSeek and Grok); sustaining mainstream usage requires reliability, safety, and monetization strategies.
• Concentration vs fragmentation. A single dominant assistant raises lock‑in risk; fragmentation complicates governance and integration. Both scenarios present tradeoffs for enterprises choosing a strategic partner.

When vendors publish crisp numbers (market share percentages or user counts), readers should ask: which metric, which geography, and which measurement vendor? If the reporting lacks that detail, treat the claim as directional and seek corroboration.

---

The near‑term outlook (90–180 days)​

Expect the following dynamics to play out:

• Continued incremental erosion of ChatGPT’s pure‑web share as Gemini and others amplify in‑app and search‑driven use cases. However, ChatGPT’s scale and ecosystem make a rapid reversal unlikely absent a catastrophic product or policy misstep.
• Feature arms race focused on multimodality, agent workflows, and on‑device models that offer privacy or latency advantages. Vendors will push more cross‑platform integrations into mail clients, office apps, and browsers.
• Increased enterprise competition with more tailored contractual terms, private model options, and differentiated compliance offerings as businesses demand safer, auditable solutions.

---

Conclusion​

The headline is simple but consequential: ChatGPT remains the category leader, but the market is no longer a monopoly of attention. Google’s Gemini has turned distribution and multimodality into tangible user growth, while Perplexity, Claude, Copilot, Grok, and China‑based entrants like DeepSeek have each found niches or episodic moments that complicate a single‑vendor narrative.
For Windows users, administrators, and enterprise buyers the practical imperative is unchanged: match the assistant to the workflow, protect sensitive data, and measure real outcomes. Avoid overreacting to single‑vendor percent swings, demand clear contractual controls when bringing assistants into regulated environments, and prioritize pilots that measure real productivity improvements rather than gimmicky feature wins. The next wave of winners will be the vendors that combine reliable, auditable technology with distribution that actually saves users time in the apps they already use — and the organizations that govern and integrate these tools sensibly will gain the most.

---

---

Source: Mint ChatGPT remains the most popular chatbot globally but Google's Gemini is catching up fast | Mint