Google Chirp 3vsSmallest Pulse

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)
  • Chirp 32.00% · 475ms
  • Pulse3.66% · 201ms

Smallest Pulse is ahead on time to first text and final-text delay, and Google Chirp 3 on the Pipecat Dataset. The Ocular Dataset is too close to call.

Last updated Methodology by Dileep Chagam

Who is better at what

Chirp 3Pulse
  • Pipecat Dataset WER2.00%3.66%
  • Ocular Dataset WER4.19%3.46%
  • Time to first text4.48s1.06s
  • Final-text delay475ms201ms

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

Chirp 3 vs Pulse FAQ

  • Google Chirp 3 is more accurate on the public clips. On the 1,000 public Pipecat clips, Google Chirp 3 scores 2.00% and Smallest Pulse 3.66%, so Google Chirp 3 makes fewer errors by 1.65 points. On the eight licensed Ocular recordings, Google Chirp 3 scores 4.19% and Smallest Pulse 3.46%, with likely ranges of 2.97 to 5.27% and 2.66 to 4.22%. 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. Smallest Pulse finishes the transcript 274ms sooner. Google Chirp 3 has the final transcript 475ms after the speaker stops and Smallest Pulse 201ms, at the median. Both are measured on the same 206 streamed turns.

  • Smallest Pulse finishes the transcript 274ms 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 3 shows first text after 4.48s and Smallest Pulse after 1.06s, at the median, so Smallest Pulse is 3.42s sooner.