All comparisons
AssemblyAISpeechmatics

AssemblyAI Universal 3.6 Pro vs Speechmatics Linden

AssemblyAI Universal 3.6 Pro is ahead of Speechmatics Linden on the Pipecat Dataset, time to first text and final-text delay. The Ocular Dataset is 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 Speechmatics Linden on every measure that separates them: accuracy on clean, scripted audio (0.69 points lower), showing words while the caller is still talking (705ms sooner) and quick turn-taking once the caller stops (56ms sooner). For 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
Speechmatics Linden
2.46%7th

AssemblyAI Universal 3.6 Pro, 0.69 points lower

Ocular Dataset WER
AssemblyAI Universal 3.6 Pro
4.50%14th
Speechmatics Linden
3.93%7th

Too close to call: inside the margin of error

Time to first text
AssemblyAI Universal 3.6 Pro
485ms1st
Speechmatics Linden
1.19s8th

AssemblyAI Universal 3.6 Pro, 705ms sooner

Final-text delay
AssemblyAI Universal 3.6 Pro
91ms3rd
Speechmatics Linden
147ms8th

AssemblyAI Universal 3.6 Pro, 56ms 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 Speechmatics Linden shows first text after 2.52s and final text after 213ms, on a bad turn (P95) across the same streamed turns.

MeasureModelP50P90P95
Time to first textAssemblyAI Universal 3.6 Pro485ms966ms967ms
Speechmatics Linden1.19s1.56s2.52s
Final-text delayAssemblyAI Universal 3.6 Pro91ms210ms232ms
Speechmatics Linden147ms192ms213ms
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.
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 ProLinden
Pipecat Dataset WER1.77%1st of 172.46%7th of 17
Ocular Dataset WER4.50%14th of 173.93%7th of 17
Time to first text485ms1st of 151.19s8th of 15
Final-text delay91ms3rd of 17147ms8th of 17
Coverage

How much audio each model was tested on

ModelPipecat clipsOcular recordingsTurns timedFailed
AssemblyAI Universal 3.6 Pro1,00082060
Speechmatics Linden998819412

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 Speechmatics Linden?

AssemblyAI Universal 3.6 Pro is more accurate on the public clips. On the 1,000 public Pipecat clips, AssemblyAI Universal 3.6 Pro scores 1.77% and Speechmatics Linden 2.46%, so AssemblyAI Universal 3.6 Pro makes fewer errors by 0.69 points. On the eight licensed Ocular recordings, AssemblyAI Universal 3.6 Pro scores 4.50% and Speechmatics Linden 3.93%, with likely ranges of 3.66 to 5.34% and 2.94 to 5.19%. 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 Speechmatics Linden?

Yes. AssemblyAI Universal 3.6 Pro finishes the transcript 56ms sooner. AssemblyAI Universal 3.6 Pro has the final transcript 91ms after the speaker stops and Speechmatics Linden 147ms, at the median. Both are measured on the same 206 streamed turns.

Is AssemblyAI Universal 3.6 Pro or Speechmatics Linden better for voice agents?

AssemblyAI Universal 3.6 Pro finishes the transcript 56ms 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 Speechmatics Linden 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 Speechmatics Linden after 1.19s, at the median, so AssemblyAI Universal 3.6 Pro is 705ms sooner.