GPT-Live 1 + GPT-6 Sol vs Cascade

Cascade is more reliable, by 7.3 points. GPT-Live 1 + GPT-6 Sol passed 62 of 82 scenarios on all three runs, and Cascade passed 68. A scenario only counts when every run of it passed.

On reliability, no: the cascade passes more scenarios on every run. Cascade is ahead on reliability, success rate, data accuracy, calls where the agent went quiet and interruption, and GPT-Live 1 + GPT-6 Sol on agent responses and response time. Both ran as the same agent, with the same prompt and tools.

Cascade, by 5.1 points. GPT-Live 1 + GPT-6 Sol saved everything exactly right on 89.0% of the calls that save data, and Cascade on 94.1%. On Booking calls, 100.0% against 98.8%. On Medicare calls, 60.6% against 81.8%. A call counts only when nothing is missing, wrong, extra or saved twice.

Yes. GPT-Live 1 + GPT-6 Sol starts replying 0.15s sooner at the median. GPT-Live 1 + GPT-6 Sol takes 2.02s at the median and 2.42s at p90; Cascade takes 2.17s and 2.51s. Both are measured on the call audio, from the caller finishing to the agent starting to reply.

Cascade, by 0.07 on a 0 to 5 scale. GPT-Live 1 + GPT-6 Sol scores 4.89 and Cascade 4.96 for how well the agent handled being talked over.

Cascade, by 11.4 points. The agent went quiet for 10 seconds or more on 12.2% of GPT-Live 1 + GPT-6 Sol calls and 0.8% of Cascade calls.

There is no verified per-minute rate for Cascade, so cost cannot be compared yet.

Cekura ran both as the whole agent in the same open-source Pipecat pipeline, with the same prompt, tools and connection. A simulated caller worked through all 82 scenarios on live calls, three times each, 3,690 calls across the benchmark. A call passes only when the agent said the right things and saved the right data. The cascade runs the same agent for reference and is never ranked.