- Home
- ...
- Voice Recognition Software
- Amazon Transcribe
- Google Cloud Speech-to-Text
- Amazon Transcribe-vs-Google Cloud Speech-to-Text
Compare Amazon Transcribe and Google Cloud Speech-to-Text 
- Users report that Google Cloud Speech-to-Text excels in accuracy with a score of 8.6, while Amazon Transcribe falls short with a lower rating, indicating that Google’s technology may better capture nuances in speech.
- Reviewers mention that Google Cloud Speech-to-Text offers superior dictation capabilities, scoring 9.2, which suggests a more seamless experience for users needing real-time transcription compared to Amazon Transcribe.
- G2 users highlight the closed captioning feature in Google Cloud Speech-to-Text, which received a high score of 9.0, making it a preferred choice for those requiring accurate captions for videos, whereas Amazon Transcribe's performance in this area is less impressive.
- Users on G2 report that Google Cloud Speech-to-Text provides better integration with existing applications, scoring 9.1, which is crucial for businesses looking to streamline workflows, while Amazon Transcribe's integration capabilities are rated lower.
- Reviewers mention that Google Cloud Speech-to-Text shines in collaboration features, scoring 9.0, allowing teams to work together more effectively on transcription projects, a feature that Amazon Transcribe does not match.
- Users say that Google Cloud Speech-to-Text's product direction is highly rated at 9.7, indicating a strong commitment to innovation and improvement, while Amazon Transcribe's lower score of 7.4 suggests potential stagnation in development.
- Standard models (all models except enhanced video and phone call): Free up to 60 minutes, Over 60 Mins up to 1 Million Mins is $0.006 / 15 seconds
- Enhanced models (video, phone call): Free up to 60 minutes, Over 60 Mins up to 1 Million Mins is $0.009 / 15 seconds
The speaker diarization is quite good as compared to other users and the transcription is fairly good.
As most speech recognition tools I’ve tried, it has trouble with names, puntuation, and similar words, which demands careful proofreading.
The best part is support for multiple languages. The transcripts are very accurate, and having it done as a cloud service helps us separate the concern of having accurate STT frmo the rest of our app.
1. Lack of documentation, or sometime the available document is incomplete or not up to date. 2. The default model does seem to pick the best model for the current audio and the user to pick a different model which performance better.
The speaker diarization is quite good as compared to other users and the transcription is fairly good.
The best part is support for multiple languages. The transcripts are very accurate, and having it done as a cloud service helps us separate the concern of having accurate STT frmo the rest of our app.
As most speech recognition tools I’ve tried, it has trouble with names, puntuation, and similar words, which demands careful proofreading.
1. Lack of documentation, or sometime the available document is incomplete or not up to date. 2. The default model does seem to pick the best model for the current audio and the user to pick a different model which performance better.
