While a multi-model approach—using the best AI for each specific task—is theoretically optimal, its practical implementation is difficult. A major roadblock is the need to create and maintain different optimized prompts for each model. This overhead leads users to default to a single, powerful model for simplicity.
Related Insights
When working with multiple AI tools (e.g., an LLM for strategy, another for code, a third for images), delegate the task of writing prompts to your main AI partner. Explain your goal, and have it generate the precise instructions for the other tools. This saves time and ensures greater precision in your communications across a complex AI stack.
With models like Gemini 3, the key skill is shifting from crafting hyper-specific, constrained prompts to making ambitious, multi-faceted requests. Users trained on older models tend to pare down their asks, but the latest AIs are 'pent up with creative capability' and yield better results from bigger challenges.
Despite access to state-of-the-art models, most ChatGPT users defaulted to older versions. The cognitive load of using a "model picker" and uncertainty about speed/quality trade-offs were bigger barriers than price. Automating this choice is key to driving mass adoption of advanced AI reasoning.
OpenAI favors "zero gradient" prompt optimization because serving thousands of unique, fine-tuned model snapshots is operationally very difficult. Prompt-based adjustments allow performance gains without the immense infrastructure burden, making it a more practical and scalable approach for both OpenAI and developers.
Rather than committing to a single LLM provider like OpenAI or Gemini, Hux uses multiple commercial models. They've found that different models excel at different tasks within their app. This multi-model strategy allows them to optimize for quality and latency on a per-workflow basis, avoiding a one-size-fits-all compromise.
Enterprises will shift from relying on a single large language model to using orchestration platforms. These platforms will allow them to 'hot swap' various models—including smaller, specialized ones—for different tasks within a single system, optimizing for performance, cost, and use case without being locked into one provider.
The comparison reveals that different AI models excel at specific tasks. Opus 4.5 is a strong front-end designer, while Codex 5.1 might be better for back-end logic. The optimal workflow involves "model switching"—assigning the right AI to the right part of the development process.
An emerging rule from enterprise deployments is to use small, fine-tuned models for well-defined, domain-specific tasks where they excel. Large models should be reserved for generic, open-ended applications with unknown query types where their broad knowledge base is necessary. This hybrid approach optimizes performance and cost.
Powerful AI tools are becoming aggregators like Manus, which intelligently select the best underlying model for a specific task—research, data visualization, or coding. This multi-model approach enables a seamless workflow within a single thread, outperforming systems reliant on one general-purpose model.
Despite constant new model releases, enterprises don't frequently switch LLMs. Prompts and workflows become highly optimized for a specific model's behavior, creating significant switching costs. Performance gains of a new model must be substantial to justify this re-engineering effort.
