All comparisons
GradiumInworld

Gradium vs Inworld STT-1

Inworld STT-1 is ahead on the Pipecat Dataset, time to first text and final-text delay, and Gradium on the Ocular Dataset.

Compare

Quality and speed frontier

Every model's error rate on the public clips, against how long its transcript takes to settle.

Most attractive quadrantPareto line
Final-text delay P50 (ms)
◣ better
Pipecat Dataset WER (%)
The line is the frontier: no model beats these on one measure without giving up the other.
Head to head

The four metrics, side by side

Pipecat Dataset WER

Word error rate on 1,000 clips from Pipecat's STT benchmark dataset.

Gradium
6.48%15th
Inworld STT-1
2.72%8th

Inworld STT-1, 3.76 points lower

Ocular Dataset WER

Word error rate on eight licensed recordings provided by Ocular.

Gradium
4.45%11th
Inworld STT-1
10.60%14th

Gradium, 6.15 points lower

Time to first text

Median delay before the first words arrive, from the first audio packet.

Gradium
1.71s10th
Inworld STT-1
1.06s5th

Inworld STT-1, 642ms sooner

Final-text delay

Median delay after the speaker stops before the transcript is final.

Gradium
212ms9th
Inworld STT-1
41ms1st

Inworld STT-1, 171ms sooner

Lower is better on every metric. The small figure is each model's place in the whole field.

Latency

First text and final text, at three percentiles

Both measured on the same 206 streamed Ocular Dataset turns. P90 and P95 say what a caller meets on a bad turn, which a median hides.

MeasureModelP50P90P95
Time to first textGradium1.71s4.05s7.32s
Inworld STT-11.06s1.07s1.07s
Final-text delayGradium212ms266ms280ms
Inworld STT-141ms60ms65ms
Ranking

Both against every other model

Open on the metric where the two sit furthest apart, with the other three a tab away.

Final-text delay after the speaker stops. Lower is better.

Median across the same 206 Ocular Dataset turns. Providers finalize differently, so compare models with similar finalization contracts before treating small gaps as meaningful.

Against the field

Both on the other two views

Pipecat vs Ocular accuracy

Every model's error rate on the public clips, against the same model on real conversations.

Most attractive quadrant
Ocular Dataset WER (%)
◣ better
Pipecat Dataset WER (%)

Transcription response time

How soon each model returns its first words, against how soon its transcript is final.

Most attractive quadrant
Final-text delay P50 (ms)
◣ better
Time to first text P50 (ms)
Coverage

What the numbers rest on

ModelPipecat clipsOcular recordingsTurns timedFailed
Gradium1,00081980
Inworld STT-11,00082060

A clip counts only where the model returned usable text, so counts differ between models. Word error rate is measured the same way throughout: incorrect, missing, and extra words against the reference transcript.

Questions

Frequently asked questions

Is Gradium or Inworld STT-1 more accurate?

On the 1,000 public Pipecat clips, Gradium scores 6.48% and Inworld STT-1 2.72%, so Inworld STT-1 makes fewer errors by 3.76 points. On the eight licensed Ocular recordings, Gradium scores 4.45% and Inworld STT-1 10.60%, so Gradium makes fewer errors by 6.15 points. The two datasets disagree, so the better choice depends on whether your audio looks more like clean public clips or real conversations.

Which is faster, Gradium or Inworld STT-1?

Inworld STT-1 returns first text 642ms sooner, at 1.06s against 1.71s at the median. Inworld STT-1 has the final transcript 171ms sooner, 41ms after the speaker stops against 212ms. Both are measured on the same 206 streamed turns.

How were Gradium and Inworld STT-1 compared?

Both ran the same two datasets under the same conditions as every other model in the benchmark: 1,000 public clips from Pipecat's STT benchmark dataset and eight licensed conversation recordings from Ocular. Gradium returned usable text for 1,000 of the public clips and Inworld STT-1 for 1,000. Latency uses each provider's own supported finalization contract.