GPT-4o Mini TranscribevsZoom Scribe

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)
  • 4o Mini Transcribe3.35% · 630ms
  • Scribe1.97% · 118ms

Zoom Scribe is ahead of GPT-4o Mini Transcribe on the Pipecat Dataset and final-text delay. The Ocular Dataset is too close to call.

Last updated Methodology by Dileep Chagam

Who is better at what

4o Mini TranscribeScribe
  • Pipecat Dataset WER3.35%1.97%
  • Ocular Dataset WER4.45%4.88%
  • Time to first textn/a1.67s
  • Final-text delay630ms118ms

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

4o Mini Transcribe vs Scribe FAQ

  • Zoom Scribe is more accurate on the public clips. On the 1,000 public Pipecat clips, GPT-4o Mini Transcribe scores 3.35% and Zoom Scribe 1.97%, so Zoom Scribe makes fewer errors by 1.39 points. On the eight licensed Ocular recordings, GPT-4o Mini Transcribe scores 4.45% and Zoom Scribe 4.88%, with likely ranges of 3.22 to 5.55% 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 512ms sooner. GPT-4o Mini Transcribe has the final transcript 630ms 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 512ms 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.

  • Only Zoom Scribe. GPT-4o Mini Transcribe returns no text until the speaker stops, which matters if your agent reacts to partial transcripts.