Cartesia Ink 2vsZoom Scribe

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
  • Scribe1.97% · 118ms

Cartesia Ink 2 is ahead on the Ocular Dataset and time to first text, and Zoom Scribe on final-text delay. The Pipecat Dataset is too close to call.

Last updated Methodology by Dileep Chagam

Who is better at what

Ink 2Scribe
  • Pipecat Dataset WER2.39%1.97%
  • Ocular Dataset WER3.09%4.88%
  • Time to first text1.51s1.67s
  • Final-text delay123ms118ms

Lower is better on every measure. Too close to call means the likely ranges overlap.

Ink 2 vs Scribe FAQ

  • Cartesia Ink 2 is more accurate on real conversations. On the 1,000 public Pipecat clips, Cartesia Ink 2 scores 2.39% and Zoom Scribe 1.97%, with likely ranges of 2.13 to 2.65% and 1.73 to 2.22%. The ranges overlap, so the difference is too close to call. On the eight licensed Ocular recordings, Cartesia Ink 2 scores 3.09% and Zoom Scribe 4.88%, so Cartesia Ink 2 makes fewer errors by 1.79 points. Word error rate counts incorrect, missing, and extra words, so lower is better.

  • No. Zoom Scribe finishes the transcript 5ms sooner. Cartesia Ink 2 has the final transcript 123ms after the speaker stops and Zoom Scribe 118ms, at the median. Both are measured on the same 206 streamed turns.

  • It is a trade-off. Cartesia Ink 2 makes fewer errors on real conversations, while Zoom Scribe finishes the transcript 5ms 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 1.51s and Zoom Scribe after 1.67s, at the median, so Cartesia Ink 2 is 157ms sooner.