Pipecat
- Strength
- A 1.97s response time with 94.21% task completion across 242 scored calls.
- What can be improved
- Routing completed, but the returned route ID was omitted from the handoff.
STT, LLM and TTS
- nova-3-general
- gpt-4.1
- sonic-3.5
Pipecat vs PolyAI
PolyAI is ahead on repeatable reliability, task completion, infrastructure reliability, tool call accuracy, voice tone and clarity and interruption handling, and Pipecat on response time.
Pipecat ranked 7 of 10 · PolyAI ranked 1 of 10
Last updated Methodology by Luis Ojeda
Which to pick
Pick Pipecat for fast replies (0.50s faster). Pick PolyAI for reliability across repeated runs (24.39 points higher), completing the caller's task (4.57 points higher), calls that connect and stay up (2.04 points higher), accurate tool calls (0.32 higher), how the agent sounds (0.23 higher) and handling interruptions (0.02 higher).
Every metric, side by side
Bars share one scale across all 10 platforms. The place next to each figure is its rank in the field.
Repeatable reliability
Share of the 82 scenarios that passed on all three runs.
- Pipecat
- 63.41%7th
- PolyAI
- 87.80%1st
PolyAI, 24.39 points higher
Task completion
Calls where the expected outcome was fully reached.
- Pipecat
- 94.21%6th
- PolyAI
- 98.78%1st
PolyAI, 4.57 points higher
Infrastructure-clean calls
Calls with no connection, audio or platform failure.
- Pipecat
- 97.15%6th
- PolyAI
- 99.19%3rd
PolyAI, 2.04 points higher
Tool call accuracy
Mean score for calling the right tool with the right arguments.
- Pipecat
- 4.58/56th
- PolyAI
- 4.90/51st
PolyAI, 0.32 higher
Voice tone and clarity
Mean score for how clear and natural the agent sounds.
- Pipecat
- 3.74/59th
- PolyAI
- 3.97/58th
PolyAI, 0.23 higher
Interruption handling
Mean score for yielding and recovering when the caller cuts in.
- Pipecat
- 4.97/54th
- PolyAI
- 4.99/52nd
PolyAI, 0.02 higher
Mean response time
Mean time for the agent to start replying after the caller stops.
- Pipecat
- 1.97s4th
- PolyAI
- 2.46s6th
Pipecat, 0.50s faster
246 calls per platform: 82 scenarios, 3 runs each.
What each platform ran, and what we saw
PolyAI
- Strength
- Leads repeatable reliability at 87.80% pass³ and task completion at 98.78% across all 246 calls.
- What can be improved
- Mean response time is 2.46s and voice tone and clarity is 3.97/5. Repetition and call termination were not scored; tool accuracy covers 237 calls and response time covers 245.
STT, LLM and TTS
- Component versions not supplied with these results
Related comparisons
- Pipecat vs Retell
- Pipecat vs LiveKit
- Pipecat vs ElevenLabs
- Pipecat vs Telnyx
- Pipecat vs GPT Realtime
- Pipecat vs Vapi
- Pipecat vs Smallest AI
- Pipecat vs Gemini Live
- PolyAI vs Retell
- PolyAI vs LiveKit
- PolyAI vs ElevenLabs
- PolyAI vs Telnyx
- PolyAI vs GPT Realtime
- PolyAI vs Vapi
- PolyAI vs Smallest AI
- PolyAI vs Gemini Live
Pipecat vs PolyAI FAQ
Is Pipecat or PolyAI more reliable?
PolyAI is more reliable, by 24.39 points. Pipecat passed 63.41% of the 82 scenarios on all 3 runs and PolyAI passed 87.80%. A scenario only counts when every run of it passed.
PolyAI is more reliable, by 24.39 points. Pipecat passed 63.41% of the 82 scenarios on all 3 runs and PolyAI passed 87.80%. A scenario only counts when every run of it passed.
Pipecat starts replying sooner, 0.50s faster. Mean response time is 1.97s for Pipecat and 2.46s for PolyAI.
Pipecat reached the expected outcome on 94.21% of calls and PolyAI on 98.78%. PolyAI is ahead on task completion.
Both ran the same Appointment and Medicare agents through the same 82 caller scenarios, 3 times each, with the same evaluators and mock tools. Only the platform and its speech and model components changed.
Test your voice agent the same way.
Cekura runs these simulated calls on your agent and scores every one.