Look, I’ll be blunt: most AI “super agents” in 2025 are still just glorified chatbots with delusions of grandeur. But two have actually broken through and delivered on the promise: Manus and GenSpark. I’ve spent the last month putting both through their paces, and the results are… complicated.
The Velvet Rope vs The People’s Champion
First, let’s address the elephant in the room: Manus is running the full Studio 54 playbook. Exclusive invites, mysterious waitlist, the works. It’s the classic “scarcity as marketing” move that Silicon Valley perfects every few years. And it works! I nearly felt special when I finally got in after a three-month wait.
GenSpark, meanwhile, is basically showing up to the party with a keg and red cups, telling everyone to help themselves. No waitlist, no velvet rope, just sign up and start using it.
Different strategies, both effective in their own way. But which actually delivers?
The Assignment
I threw real-world tasks at both agents to see what they could do. For Manus, I asked it to find all moving companies in Hong Kong, including Cantonese and English-speaking options, and compile everything into a spreadsheet with contact info, reviews, and pricing.
can you find all the moving companies in hong kong? I'm moving houses. Find their contact numbers, review and their price if possible and put it into a spreadsheet. I want both cantonese and english moving companies, I don't mind if the spreadsheet contains a mixture of both languagesFor GenSpark, I went with a classic bachelor party planning scenario:
i'm going to Ho Chi Minh city. we are 6 guys 40 years old. we are living at 100 Trần Hưng Đạo 100/31, Pham Ngu Lao ward, Quận 1, Hồ Chí Minh 700000, Vietnam. Can you find some restaurant suggestions for our 3 day 2 night trip?Basic productivity stuff that any half-decent EA could handle, but surprisingly difficult for most AI systems.
Manus: The Expensive Date
You can download the spreadsheet here
Manus delivered. The spreadsheet was comprehensive, clean, and immediately useful. It included a mix of English and Cantonese companies, organized logically, with all the contact details I needed. No hallucinations, no weird gaps in logic.
The experience felt like asking a hyper-competent assistant with OCD tendencies to handle a task. It just worked.
But here’s the problem: I burned through credits faster than a tech bro at Burning Man. Manus gives you 1,000 credits upfront, and once they’re gone, they’re gone. My moving company research chewed through a substantial chunk of that allotment.
It’s the AI equivalent of dating someone with expensive taste. Impressive? Absolutely. Sustainable for everyday use? Not unless you’re rolling in disposable income.
GenSpark: Your Reliable But Slightly Disheveled Friend
GenSpark’s restaurant recommendations for Ho Chi Minh City weren’t as polished as what Manus produced, but they were absolutely solid. The list included a good mix of options, distance info, price ranges, and some local context that showed it understood the assignment.
Was it perfect? No. The formatting was utilitarian rather than beautiful. I needed to ask a follow-up question to clarify a couple points. But it got the job done without drama.
The killer feature: 200 credits reset daily. This completely changes the relationship. With Manus, every query feels like you’re burning limited resources. With GenSpark, you can actually integrate it into your daily routine without anxiety.
It’s like the difference between a friend who can only hang out at Michelin-starred restaurants versus one who’s always down to grab tacos. Both have their place, but only one becomes part of your regular life.
The Brutal Truth About AI Agents in 2025
Here’s what nobody wants to admit: the killer feature of these tools isn’t their intelligence – it’s their reliability. Both Manus and GenSpark are useful primarily because they don’t completely hallucinate or go off the rails during basic tasks.
The bar is that low. We’re still impressed when an AI doesn’t completely make stuff up or waste our time with useless platitudes. That should tell you something about the state of the industry.
The Economics Make No Sense (For Now)
Let’s talk about the elephant in the room: neither of these business models seems sustainable.
Manus is burning compute resources on premium tasks but has an artificially constrained user base due to its exclusivity model. GenSpark is offering daily credits that likely cost more to provide than whatever they’re charging users.
Both are clearly subsidized by venture funding in the classic “growth now, profits later” model. The question is which will find a path to sustainability first, and whether that path will destroy what makes them useful in the first place.
Who Should Use What?
If you’re a consultant, lawyer, or finance bro who needs to impress clients with polished deliverables and can expense the cost, Manus is your move. It’s the Patagonia vest of AI tools – slightly overpriced but signaling the right things to the right people.
If you’re literally anyone else who wants to incorporate AI assistance into your actual life without going broke, GenSpark is the obvious choice. It’s the Toyota Camry – not sexy, but it gets you where you need to go every single day for years.
The Winner Is Clear (For Most People)
For 90% of users, GenSpark wins this battle handily. The daily credit refresh creates a sustainable relationship with the tool that Manus’s finite credits can’t match. It’s good enough for most tasks, available when you need it, and doesn’t make you ration your usage like you’re in an AI dystopia.
But that remaining 10%? The ones doing high-stakes, complex work where polish and perfection matter? Manus earns its premium positioning for them. Just be prepared to pay up.
What This Means For The Future
The split between these two models – premium/exclusive vs. accessible/sustainable – reflects a broader trend in AI development. We’re watching the same bifurcation that happened with smartphones, social media, and pretty much every other technology.
The market is separating into “good enough for most people” and “exceptional for those willing to pay.” The middle ground is evaporating faster than common sense at a crypto conference.
My prediction: by 2027, we’ll see Manus go enterprise-only with six-figure contracts while GenSpark expands to become the default personal AI for everyday users. The notion of a “super agent” will seem quaint as these tools either become specialized business services or blend invisibly into our digital environments.
Until then, choose based on your actual needs, not the marketing hype. If you need daily assistance within a reasonable budget, GenSpark is your play. If you need perfection for occasional high-stakes tasks and have the budget to match, Manus delivers.
Just don’t expect either to replace human judgment anytime soon. These are tools, not replacements. The human who knows how to use them effectively still has the real advantage – and that’s not changing in 2025, no matter what the AI evangelists claim.
