All comparisons
AssemblyAIGoogle

AssemblyAI Universal 3.6 Pro vs Google Chirp 3

AssemblyAI Universal 3.6 Pro is ahead of Google Chirp 3 on time to first text and final-text delay. The Pipecat Dataset and The Ocular Dataset are too close to call.

Last updated Methodology by Dileep Chagam

Compare

Accuracy vs speed

Each dot is one model. Bottom-left is best: fewer errors and a faster final transcript.

Top half on bothBest picks
Final-text delay P50 (ms)
Pipecat Dataset WER (%)
Shaded box: top half on both measures. Dotted line: no other model is both more accurate and faster.
Verdict

Which to pick

AssemblyAI Universal 3.6 Pro is the better pick over Google Chirp 3 on every measure that separates them: showing words while the caller is still talking (4.00s sooner) and quick turn-taking once the caller stops (384ms sooner). For accuracy on clean, scripted audio and accuracy on real phone conversations, the gap is inside the margin of error, so neither is ahead.

Head to head

The four metrics, side by side

Pipecat Dataset WER
AssemblyAI Universal 3.6 Pro
1.77%1st
Google Chirp 3
2.00%3rd

Too close to call: inside the margin of error

Ocular Dataset WER
AssemblyAI Universal 3.6 Pro
4.50%14th
Google Chirp 3
4.19%9th

Too close to call: inside the margin of error

Time to first text
AssemblyAI Universal 3.6 Pro
485ms1st
Google Chirp 3
4.48s14th

AssemblyAI Universal 3.6 Pro, 4.00s sooner

Final-text delay
AssemblyAI Universal 3.6 Pro
91ms3rd
Google Chirp 3
475ms13th

AssemblyAI Universal 3.6 Pro, 384ms sooner

Lower is better on every metric. The small figure is each model's place in the whole field. What each metric measures.

WER · Word error rate
Share of words the model got wrong: replaced, missing or added. Lower is better.
Pipecat Dataset
1,000 short public clips from Pipecat's STT benchmark dataset.
Ocular Dataset
8 recordings from 4 real phone conversations, licensed from Ocular.
TTFT · Time to first text
How long after the audio starts streaming until the first words appear.
TTFS · Final-text delay
How long after the caller stops until the full transcript arrives. A voice agent waits for this before it replies.
Latency

First text and final text, at three percentiles

AssemblyAI Universal 3.6 Pro shows first text after 967ms and final text after 232ms, and Google Chirp 3 shows first text after 7.97s and final text after 1.41s, on a bad turn (P95) across the same streamed turns.

MeasureModelP50P90P95
Time to first textAssemblyAI Universal 3.6 Pro485ms966ms967ms
Google Chirp 34.48s6.21s7.97s
Final-text delayAssemblyAI Universal 3.6 Pro91ms210ms232ms
Google Chirp 3475ms*941ms*1.41s*
P50 / P90 / P95 · Typical, slow and slowest turns
Half of turns are faster than P50. Only 1 in 10 is slower than P90, and 1 in 20 slower than P95.

* Final-text delay is the observed time after stream close, because controlled finalization is not available for this model. Compare it with care against models that finalize on request.

Ranking

How each ranks among all 17 models

Place among the 17 models on each metric. Lower is better on all four.

MetricUniversal 3.6 ProChirp 3
Pipecat Dataset WER1.77%1st of 172.00%3rd of 17
Ocular Dataset WER4.50%14th of 174.19%9th of 17
Time to first text485ms1st of 154.48s14th of 15
Final-text delay91ms3rd of 17475ms13th of 17
Coverage

How much audio each model was tested on

ModelPipecat clipsOcular recordingsTurns timedFailed
AssemblyAI Universal 3.6 Pro1,00082060
Google Chirp 31,00082060

Only clips with usable text count, so the two totals can differ. How WER is scored.

Questions

Frequently asked questions

Which is more accurate, AssemblyAI Universal 3.6 Pro or Google Chirp 3?

AssemblyAI Universal 3.6 Pro and Google Chirp 3 are too close to call on accuracy. On the 1,000 public Pipecat clips, AssemblyAI Universal 3.6 Pro scores 1.77% and Google Chirp 3 2.00%, with likely ranges of 1.55 to 2.00% and 1.77 to 2.25%. The ranges overlap, so the difference is too close to call. On the eight licensed Ocular recordings, AssemblyAI Universal 3.6 Pro scores 4.50% and Google Chirp 3 4.19%, with likely ranges of 3.66 to 5.34% and 2.97 to 5.27%. The ranges overlap, so the difference is too close to call. Word error rate counts incorrect, missing, and extra words, so lower is better.

Is AssemblyAI Universal 3.6 Pro faster than Google Chirp 3?

Yes. AssemblyAI Universal 3.6 Pro finishes the transcript 384ms sooner. AssemblyAI Universal 3.6 Pro has the final transcript 91ms after the speaker stops and Google Chirp 3 475ms, at the median. Both are measured on the same 206 streamed turns.

Is AssemblyAI Universal 3.6 Pro or Google Chirp 3 better for voice agents?

AssemblyAI Universal 3.6 Pro finishes the transcript 384ms sooner, and the two are too close to call on real conversations. A voice agent cannot reply until the final transcript arrives, and the Ocular recordings are real conversations.

Do AssemblyAI Universal 3.6 Pro and Google Chirp 3 stream text while the speaker is talking?

Yes, both return partial text before the speaker stops. AssemblyAI Universal 3.6 Pro shows first text after 485ms and Google Chirp 3 after 4.48s, at the median, so AssemblyAI Universal 3.6 Pro is 4.00s sooner.