Popularity ranking & data list of major AI tools
Each AI's market share, popularity score, pricing and features, shown as data. On each tool's detail page you can check its history, comparisons and pricing (as of Sep 2026).
OpenAI's AI chat — the default choice, leading the global AI chatbot market share by a wide margin.
Google's AI chat — strong at search and Google-service integration; share is rising fast, especially in Japan.
Microsoft's assistant — its strength is integration with Windows and Office.
Anthropic's AI chat — praised for long-form writing, coding and careful prose; share is trending up.
An AI search engine that answers with citations; very popular for search use cases.
A high-performance, low-cost AI from China — free web chat and very cheap API.
xAI's AI chat — known for X (formerly Twitter) integration, real-time info and image generation.
Feature support across major AI tools
One table showing whether each major AI supports image input, image generation, voice, file reading, web search, code, API and mobile apps. See each tool page for details.
| AI tool | Japanese support | Image input | Image generation | Voice chat | File reading | Web search | Code generation | API | Mobile app | Supported |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ChatGPT | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | 9/9 |
| Google Gemini | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | 9/9 |
| Microsoft Copilot | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | 8/9 |
| Claude | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | 8/9 |
| Perplexity | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | 7/9 |
| DeepSeek | Yes | No | No | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | 6/9 |
| Grok | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | 9/9 |
Reference values based on each vendor's public information. Available features may differ by plan.
Frequently asked questions
How are the major AI tools on this list chosen?
How is the popularity score calculated?
⚠ Reference values based on public data and editorial research; not a complete count of actual users.