Left gets fewer words wrong. Lower has the final text ready sooner.
Cartesia Ink 2 is ahead of Zoom Scribe Pro on the Ocular Dataset, time to first text and final-text delay. The Pipecat Dataset is too close to call.
Last updated Methodology by Dileep Chagam
Lower is better on every measure. Too close to call means the likely ranges overlap.
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 Pro 1.96%, with likely ranges of 2.13 to 2.65% and 1.73 to 2.20%. 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 Pro 4.84%, so Cartesia Ink 2 makes fewer errors by 1.75 points. Word error rate counts incorrect, missing, and extra words, so lower is better.
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 Pro 1.96%, with likely ranges of 2.13 to 2.65% and 1.73 to 2.20%. 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 Pro 4.84%, so Cartesia Ink 2 makes fewer errors by 1.75 points. Word error rate counts incorrect, missing, and extra words, so lower is better.
Yes. Cartesia Ink 2 finishes the transcript 39ms sooner. Cartesia Ink 2 has the final transcript 123ms after the speaker stops and Zoom Scribe Pro 162ms, 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 39ms 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 Pro after 1.70s, at the median, so Cartesia Ink 2 is 188ms sooner.