All comparisons
OpenAIReson8

GPT-4o Mini Transcribe vs Reson8

Reson8 is ahead of GPT-4o Mini Transcribe on the Pipecat Dataset, the Ocular Dataset and final-text delay.

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.

GPT-4o Mini Transcribe
3.35%9th
Reson8
2.10%3rd

Reson8, 1.26 points lower

Ocular Dataset WER

Word error rate on eight licensed recordings provided by Ocular.

GPT-4o Mini Transcribe
4.45%11th
Reson8
2.93%1st

Reson8, 1.52 points lower

Time to first text

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

GPT-4o Mini Transcribe
No text until the speaker stops
Reson8
2.40s11th

Not comparable

Final-text delay

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

GPT-4o Mini Transcribe
630ms14th
Reson8
235ms10th

Reson8, 395ms 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 textGPT-4o Mini TranscribeNo text until the speaker stops
Reson82.40s7.97s10.20s
Final-text delayGPT-4o Mini Transcribe630ms1.34s1.53s
Reson8235ms357ms398ms
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
GPT-4o Mini Transcribe1,00082060
Reson81,00082010

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 GPT-4o Mini Transcribe or Reson8 more accurate?

On the 1,000 public Pipecat clips, GPT-4o Mini Transcribe scores 3.35% and Reson8 2.10%, so Reson8 makes fewer errors by 1.26 points. On the eight licensed Ocular recordings, GPT-4o Mini Transcribe scores 4.45% and Reson8 2.93%, so Reson8 makes fewer errors by 1.52 points. Word error rate counts incorrect, missing, and extra words against the reference transcript, so lower is better.

Which is faster, GPT-4o Mini Transcribe or Reson8?

GPT-4o Mini Transcribe returns no text while the speaker is talking, so time to first text cannot be compared. Reson8 has the final transcript 395ms sooner, 235ms after the speaker stops against 630ms. Both are measured on the same 206 streamed turns.

How were GPT-4o Mini Transcribe and Reson8 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. GPT-4o Mini Transcribe returned usable text for 1,000 of the public clips and Reson8 for 1,000. Latency uses each provider's own supported finalization contract.