All comparisons
InworldSmallest

Inworld STT-1 vs Smallest Pulse

Inworld STT-1 is ahead on the Pipecat Dataset and final-text delay, and Smallest Pulse on the Ocular Dataset. The two tie on time to first text.

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.

Inworld STT-1
2.72%8th
Smallest Pulse
3.66%11th

Inworld STT-1, 0.94 points lower

Ocular Dataset WER

Word error rate on eight licensed recordings provided by Ocular.

Inworld STT-1
10.60%14th
Smallest Pulse
3.46%3rd

Smallest Pulse, 7.15 points lower

Time to first text

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

Inworld STT-1
1.06s5th
Smallest Pulse
1.06s4th

Level

Final-text delay

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

Inworld STT-1
41ms1st
Smallest Pulse
201ms8th

Inworld STT-1, 160ms 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 textInworld STT-11.06s1.07s1.07s
Smallest Pulse1.06s2.25s3.03s
Final-text delayInworld STT-141ms60ms65ms
Smallest Pulse201ms356ms773ms
Ranking

Both against every other model

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

Word error rate on eight licensed recordings provided by Ocular. Lower is better.

Counts are the clips each model returned usable text for, so they differ between models and between datasets.

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
Inworld STT-11,00082060
Smallest Pulse1,00082060

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 Inworld STT-1 or Smallest Pulse more accurate?

On the 1,000 public Pipecat clips, Inworld STT-1 scores 2.72% and Smallest Pulse 3.66%, so Inworld STT-1 makes fewer errors by 0.94 points. On the eight licensed Ocular recordings, Inworld STT-1 scores 10.60% and Smallest Pulse 3.46%, so Smallest Pulse makes fewer errors by 7.15 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, Inworld STT-1 or Smallest Pulse?

Both return first text after 1.06s at the median. Inworld STT-1 has the final transcript 160ms sooner, 41ms after the speaker stops against 201ms. Both are measured on the same 206 streamed turns.

How were Inworld STT-1 and Smallest Pulse 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. Inworld STT-1 returned usable text for 1,000 of the public clips and Smallest Pulse for 1,000. Latency uses each provider's own supported finalization contract.