GPT Realtime 2.1 vs GPT Realtime 2.1 Mini

GPT Realtime 2.1 is more reliable, by 29.3 points. GPT Realtime 2.1 passed 65 of 82 scenarios on all three runs, and GPT Realtime 2.1 Mini passed 41. A scenario only counts when every run of it passed.

For a voice agent, GPT Realtime 2.1, since it gets more scenarios right on every run. GPT Realtime 2.1 is ahead on reliability, success rate, agent responses, data accuracy and response time, and GPT Realtime 2.1 Mini on calls where the agent went quiet, interruption and cost.

GPT Realtime 2.1, by 27.5 points. GPT Realtime 2.1 saved everything exactly right on 92.0% of the calls that save data, and GPT Realtime 2.1 Mini on 64.5%. On Booking calls, 95.9% against 88.8%. On Medicare calls, 81.8% against 0.0%. A call counts only when nothing is missing, wrong, extra or saved twice.

Yes. GPT Realtime 2.1 starts replying 0.15s sooner at the median. GPT Realtime 2.1 takes 1.94s at the median and 2.46s at p90; GPT Realtime 2.1 Mini takes 2.08s and 2.75s. Both are measured on the call audio, from the caller finishing to the agent starting to reply.

GPT Realtime 2.1 Mini, by 0.01 on a 0 to 5 scale. GPT Realtime 2.1 scores 4.98 and GPT Realtime 2.1 Mini 4.99 for how well the agent handled being talked over.

GPT Realtime 2.1 Mini, by 0.8 points. The agent went quiet for 10 seconds or more on 3.3% of GPT Realtime 2.1 calls and 2.5% of GPT Realtime 2.1 Mini calls.

GPT Realtime 2.1 Mini is $0.0651 cheaper a minute. GPT Realtime 2.1 costs $0.0853 a minute of call and GPT Realtime 2.1 Mini $0.0202, 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, 3,690 calls across the benchmark. A call passes only when the agent said the right things and saved the right data.