Left gets fewer words wrong. Lower has the final text ready sooner.
Zoom Scribe is ahead of Google Chirp 2 on the Pipecat Dataset, time to first text and final-text delay. The Ocular Dataset is too close to call. Google Chirp 2 has a newer release: Google Chirp 3 vs Zoom Scribe.
Last updated Methodology by Dileep Chagam
Lower is better on every measure. Too close to call means the likely ranges overlap.
Both providers, every model: Google vs Zoom
Zoom Scribe is more accurate on the public clips. On the 1,000 public Pipecat clips, Google Chirp 2 scores 2.59% and Zoom Scribe 1.97%, so Zoom Scribe makes fewer errors by 0.62 points. On the eight licensed Ocular recordings, Google Chirp 2 scores 3.80% and Zoom Scribe 4.88%, with likely ranges of 2.93 to 4.60% and 4.41 to 5.29%. The ranges overlap, so the difference is too close to call. Word error rate counts incorrect, missing, and extra words, so lower is better.
Zoom Scribe is more accurate on the public clips. On the 1,000 public Pipecat clips, Google Chirp 2 scores 2.59% and Zoom Scribe 1.97%, so Zoom Scribe makes fewer errors by 0.62 points. On the eight licensed Ocular recordings, Google Chirp 2 scores 3.80% and Zoom Scribe 4.88%, with likely ranges of 2.93 to 4.60% and 4.41 to 5.29%. The ranges overlap, so the difference is too close to call. Word error rate counts incorrect, missing, and extra words, so lower is better.
No. Zoom Scribe finishes the transcript 450ms sooner. Google Chirp 2 has the final transcript 568ms after the speaker stops and Zoom Scribe 118ms, at the median. Both are measured on the same 206 streamed turns.
Zoom Scribe finishes the transcript 450ms 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.
Yes, both return partial text before the speaker stops. Google Chirp 2 shows first text after 4.50s and Zoom Scribe after 1.67s, at the median, so Zoom Scribe is 2.83s sooner.