Arabic Speech-to-Text Comparison

Soniox STT RT v3vsSpeechmatics

Head-to-head comparison based on real production benchmarks with Gulf Arabic callers.

Overview

Soniox STT RT v3

Good

High-quality Arabic STT with 44% lower WER than Google Chirp 3.

production testedstt-rt-v3

Speechmatics

Not Recommended

Ultra-fast Arabic STT with poor transcription quality.

production testedstandard

Latency

Soniox STT RT v3

Avg EOU Delay1678ms
Best Case773ms
Worst Case2718ms
Full turn time: 6000ms–8000ms

Speechmatics

Avg EOU Delay460ms
Best Case0ms
Worst Case806ms

Quality

Soniox STT RT v3

Excellent
WER: 16.2%

Great quality transcription confirmed by user feedback. No repetitions needed. 44% more accurate than Google Chirp 3.

Gulf ArabicMSA

Speechmatics

Poor

Users had to repeat themselves frequently. Quality unacceptable for production use.

MSA

Features

FeatureSoniox STT RT v3Speechmatics
Real-time streaming transcription✓✓
Language hints✓✗
Low word error rate✓✗
End-of-utterance detection✓✗
Configurable endpointing✗✓
Standard and enhanced operating points✗✓
Custom dictionary✗✓

Pricing

Soniox STT RT v3

Free tier
StandardReal-time streaming
$0.005per minute

Speechmatics

Free tier
StandardReal-time streaming
$0.0042per minute

Streaming & Integration

CapabilitySoniox STT RT v3Speechmatics
Streaming support✓✓
LiveKit plugin✗✗
Self-hostable✗✓
API styleWebSocket streamingWebSocket streaming + REST
SDKsPython, Node.jsPython, Node.js

Verdict

Good

Soniox STT RT v3

Previously the best option for Arabic STT. Excellent quality with 16.2% WER, but superseded by Deepgram Nova-3 which is 75% faster with comparable quality.

Choose Soniox STT RT v3 if you need:

  • Accuracy-critical applications
  • Arabic transcription quality
Pros
  • +Lowest WER for Arabic (16.2%)
  • +No user repetitions needed
  • +30% faster than Google Chirp 3
Cons
  • -Higher latency than Deepgram Nova-3 (1.7s vs 0.4s)
  • -No LiveKit plugin
  • -Limited SDK support
Not Recommended

Speechmatics

Amazingly fast but Arabic quality is too poor for production. The speed advantage is meaningless when users have to repeat themselves.

Choose Speechmatics if you need:

  • Speed-only use cases where quality doesn't matter
Pros
  • +Lightning-fast endpointing (0-460ms)
  • +Self-hosting option available
  • +Configurable latency/quality tradeoff
Cons
  • -Poor Arabic transcription quality
  • -Users had to repeat themselves
  • -Quality issues negate speed advantage

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is faster for Arabic speech-to-text, Soniox STT RT v3 or Speechmatics?

Speechmatics is faster with an average end-of-utterance delay of 460ms, which is 1218ms faster than Soniox STT RT v3.

Which has better Arabic transcription quality, Soniox STT RT v3 or Speechmatics?

Soniox STT RT v3 has a quality rating of 5/5 (Excellent). Great quality transcription confirmed by user feedback. No repetitions needed. 44% more accurate than Google Chirp 3.

Is Soniox STT RT v3 or Speechmatics better for production voice agents?

Both providers are viable options. Soniox STT RT v3: Previously the best option for Arabic STT. Excellent quality with 16.2% WER, but superseded by Deepgram Nova-3 which is 75% faster with comparable quality. Speechmatics: Amazingly fast but Arabic quality is too poor for production. The speed advantage is meaningless when users have to repeat themselves.

How does Soniox STT RT v3 pricing compare to Speechmatics?

Soniox STT RT v3 starts at $0.005 per minute (Real-time streaming). Speechmatics starts at $0.0042 per minute (Real-time streaming).