Cartesia Ink 2 vs Gradium

Compare

Accuracy and speed

Left gets fewer words wrong. Lower has the final text ready sooner.

Accurate and fast0ms200ms400ms600ms800ms0%2%4%6%8%Words wrong on clean audio (Pipecat WER)
  • Ink 22.39% · 123ms
  • Gradium6.48% · 212ms

Cartesia Ink 2 is ahead of Gradium on both datasets together, 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

Who is better at what

Ink 2Gradium
  • Overall WER2.63%5.78%
  • Pipecat Dataset WER2.39%6.48%
  • Ocular Dataset WER3.09%4.45%
  • Time to first text1.51s1.71s
  • Final-text delay123ms212ms

Lower is better on every measure. Too close to call means the likely ranges overlap. For its voices, see our notes on Cartesia text to speech.

Ink 2 vs Gradium FAQ

  • Cartesia Ink 2 is more accurate on both datasets. On the 1,000 public Pipecat clips, Cartesia Ink 2 scores 2.63% and Gradium 5.78%, so Cartesia Ink 2 makes fewer errors by 3.15 points. On the eight licensed Ocular recordings, Cartesia Ink 2 scores 2.39% and Gradium 6.48%, so Cartesia Ink 2 makes fewer errors by 4.09 points. Word error rate counts incorrect, missing, and extra words, so lower is better.

  • Yes. Cartesia Ink 2 finishes the transcript 194ms sooner. Cartesia Ink 2 has the final transcript 1.51s after the speaker stops and Gradium 1.71s, at the median. Both are measured on the same 206 streamed turns.

  • Cartesia Ink 2 is the stronger pick for voice agents: it makes fewer errors on real conversations and finishes the transcript 194ms sooner. A voice agent cannot reply until the final transcript arrives, and the Ocular recordings are real conversations.

  • Yes, both return partial text before the speaker stops. Cartesia Ink 2 shows first text after 3.09% and Gradium after 4.45%, at the median.

Test your voice agent the same way.

Cekura runs these simulated calls on your agent and scores every one.