Left gets fewer words wrong. Lower has the final text ready sooner.
Fish Audio Transcribe Stream 1 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
Lower is better on every measure. Too close to call means the likely ranges overlap. Our guide explains how word error rate is measured.
Fish Audio Transcribe Stream 1 is more accurate on both datasets. On the 1,000 public Pipecat clips, Fish Audio Transcribe Stream 1 scores 2.21% and Gradium 5.78%, so Fish Audio Transcribe Stream 1 makes fewer errors by 3.57 points. On the eight licensed Ocular recordings, Fish Audio Transcribe Stream 1 scores 1.90% and Gradium 6.48%, so Fish Audio Transcribe Stream 1 makes fewer errors by 4.57 points. Word error rate counts incorrect, missing, and extra words, so lower is better.
Fish Audio Transcribe Stream 1 is more accurate on both datasets. On the 1,000 public Pipecat clips, Fish Audio Transcribe Stream 1 scores 2.21% and Gradium 5.78%, so Fish Audio Transcribe Stream 1 makes fewer errors by 3.57 points. On the eight licensed Ocular recordings, Fish Audio Transcribe Stream 1 scores 1.90% and Gradium 6.48%, so Fish Audio Transcribe Stream 1 makes fewer errors by 4.57 points. Word error rate counts incorrect, missing, and extra words, so lower is better.
Yes. Fish Audio Transcribe Stream 1 finishes the transcript 975ms sooner. Fish Audio Transcribe Stream 1 has the final transcript 730ms after the speaker stops and Gradium 1.71s, at the median. Both are measured on the same 206 streamed turns.
Fish Audio Transcribe Stream 1 is the stronger pick for voice agents: it makes fewer errors on real conversations and finishes the transcript 975ms 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. Fish Audio Transcribe Stream 1 shows first text after 2.78% and Gradium after 4.45%, at the median.
Cekura runs these simulated calls on your agent and scores every one.