Council AI asks up to 24 models and hands you a verdict. Bordet seats a few of the best, makes them argue, and keeps the project's memory for the people in the room.
Council AI is the breadth play. Your prompt goes to up to 24 models from nine labs, GPT, Claude, Gemini, Grok, DeepSeek, Qwen, Mistral, Kimi and GLM, and a moderator model synthesises one verdict with the disagreements listed under it and a numeric agreement score. Plus is $19.99 a month for up to seven models, Pro $39.99 for ten, and Ultra $99.99 for the full set plus a document library and an MCP server. For judging a piece of work, it is a strong tool.
Breadth is not the same as collaboration. The 24 models answer alone and the moderator reconciles them; they never read each other. Workspaces organise one person's projects, and the memory is that person's, importable from ChatGPT or Claude. Nobody else sits in the room, and nothing records what the person decided after reading the verdict. Documents and MCP arrive only on the $99.99 tier.
Bordet is the depth play. A few frontier models, GPT-6 Astra, Claude Fable 5.1, Gemini 3.1 Pro, Grok 4.6, sit in one thread with roles and read each other, so a disagreement is an exchange you can follow and settle. The room keeps one memory every model and every person reads: objective, status, open questions, confirmed decisions, sources cited by name, deliverables with versions. Files and links are in every room from the first dollar, and so is the connection that lets your own claude.ai, ChatGPT or Claude Code take a seat.
| Capability | Bordet | Council AI |
|---|---|---|
| Number of models per question | As many members as you seat, typically three to five, from GPT, Claude, Gemini, Grok and DeepSeek | Up to 7, 10 or 24 depending on plan |
| Do the models read each other? | Yes, one shared thread; they challenge and build on each other by name | No, independent answers reconciled by a moderator |
| A written verdict | Not yet: the argument is on the page and you record the outcome on the board | Yes, with an agreement score |
| Memory | One project memory read by every model and person in the room | Personal memory, importable from ChatGPT or Claude |
| Other people in the same room | Yes, live, with invite links and guests | No |
| Documents and links as shared context | Every room: links, PDF and Word files, notes, cited by name | Personal library on Ultra ($99.99/mo) |
| MCP | Every account, both ways: your tool asks the room, or takes a seat the room can address | Ultra only; your tool queries the council |
| A record of decisions | Decisions log with confirm, plus a board of objective, status and open questions | No |
| Pricing | Free $2 to start, credits from $5, or bring your own keys; per-room spend caps | $19.99, $39.99 or $99.99 a month |
Comparison reflects our understanding as of September 2026; check Council AI's site for their current features.
For a score, more votes help. For a decision, the useful signal is one model changing another's mind, or refusing to. Bordet is built for that exchange: Claude reads GPT's number, says why it is wrong, and GPT answers. Then the outcome goes on the record. You can seat as many members as you like, and a Critic role is one click.
No. Bordet shows you the disagreement itself and lets you settle it by confirming a decision. A written round-up of where the table agrees and disagrees is on our list; it will sit on top of the argument when it ships.
Bordet's catalog is the frontier from OpenAI, Anthropic, Google, xAI and DeepSeek, and it grows. If you need Qwen, Kimi or GLM specifically, Council AI or a bring-your-own-key setup is the way. Most rooms find three or four strong members are plenty.
Open a boardroom, give each model a role, and watch the team remember what you decided.