Deepslate OpalvsGrok Voice 3.0

Grok Voice 3.0 is more reliable, by 24.4 points. Deepslate Opal passed 47 of 82 scenarios on all three runs, and Grok Voice 3.0 passed 67. A scenario only counts when every run of it passed.

For a voice agent, Grok Voice 3.0, since it gets more scenarios right on every run. Grok Voice 3.0 is ahead of Deepslate Opal on all eight metrics.

Grok Voice 3.0, by 14.8 points. Deepslate Opal saved everything exactly right on 72.6% of the calls that save data, and Grok Voice 3.0 on 87.3%. On Booking calls, 85.4% against 98.2%. On Medicare calls, 39.4% against 59.1%. A call counts only when nothing is missing, wrong, extra or saved twice.

No. Grok Voice 3.0 starts replying 0.93s sooner at the median. Deepslate Opal takes 2.27s at the median and 2.83s at p90; Grok Voice 3.0 takes 1.34s and 1.62s. Both are measured on the call audio, from the caller finishing to the agent starting to reply.

Grok Voice 3.0, by 0.02 on a 0 to 5 scale. Deepslate Opal scores 4.96 and Grok Voice 3.0 4.98 for how well the agent handled being talked over.

Grok Voice 3.0, by 5.3 points. The agent went quiet for 10 seconds or more on 5.3% of Deepslate Opal calls and 0.0% of Grok Voice 3.0 calls.

Grok Voice 3.0 is $0.032 cheaper a minute. Deepslate Opal costs $0.112 a minute of call and Grok Voice 3.0 $0.080, at each vendor's published rates.

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, 3,198 calls across the benchmark. A call passes only when the agent said the right things and saved the right data.