Updated Feb 19, 2025
Comparing ElevenLabs and Deepgram Voice AI Models
Explore the differences between ElevenLabs and Deepgram. Learn more about pricing, model performances and product features.
Comparing ElevenLabs and Deepgram Voice AI Models
Both platforms offer advanced voice AI capabilities, but ElevenLabs excels with fast voice generation and Deepgram can create more natrual voices.
Look for a ElevenLabs and Deepgram Alternatives?
Voice Clone with 3s of Audio
Cartesia's voice cloning captures emotional depth with just 3s audio, with professional-grade cloning available for 60-min samples.
Ultra-Realistic Voices
Experience lifelike voices that sound almost identical to human speech—perfect for creating engaging content and interactive voice agents.
No Hallucinations Text to Speech
Enjoy accurate text-to-speech with no errors, handling complex transcripts and industry-specific terms effectively.
Enterprise Ready
Enterprise-grade reliability with 99.9% uptime, SOC2 compliance, and full on-premises support.
How they stack up
Voice Quality Comparison
In terms of speech naturalness, ElevenLabs scored Medium in 44.98% of cases, while Deepgram achieved a High in 57.78% of cases, making Deepgram's voices more natural than ElevenLabs.
ElevenLabs also demonstrated excellent pronunciation accuracy at 81.97%, whereas Deepgram's pronunciation accuracy was slightly lower at 64.43%.
Overall, ElevenLabs excels in accuracy, while Deepgram shows promise in producing more natural-sounding speech.
Latency Evaluation Insights
In our latency evaluation, we measured the Time to First Audio (TTFA) for both ElevenLabs and Deepgram.
By calculating the 90th percentile score from 100 TTFA measurements for each provider, we found that ElevenLabs had a TTFA of 135ms, indicating a quick response time. Deepgram, while slightly slower, still performed well with a TTFA of 150ms.
This evaluation highlights ElevenLabs' advantage in low-latency performance, making it a strong choice for applications requiring immediate audio feedback.
Hallucination Rate Analysis
The hallucination rate was assessed for both ElevenLabs and Deepgram to determine how often the models generated inaccurate or nonsensical outputs.
ElevenLabs demonstrated a lower hallucination rate, with a WER of 2.83%, indicating a strong performance in generating coherent speech. Deepgram, however, had a higher WER of 5.67%, suggesting a greater tendency for inaccuracies.
This evaluation underscores ElevenLabs' strength in producing reliable outputs, while Deepgram may need further refinement to reduce hallucination occurrences.
Voice Design Control Test
In evaluating voice design controllability, ElevenLabs and Deepgram were assessed based on their ability to adapt voice characteristics.
ElevenLabs scored high in context awareness, with 63.37% of cases showing excellent adaptation to tone and emphasis. Deepgram, while performing adequately, had a lower context awareness score of 53.18%.
Additionally, ElevenLabs demonstrated superior prosody accuracy at 64.57%, compared to Deepgram's 55.52%. This evaluation highlights ElevenLabs' advantage in providing users with more control over voice design.
Explore Pricing Comparisons for ElevenLabs and Deepgram
Trusted by leading enterprises. Speaking from experience.
Discover success stories
“Cartesia Sonic 3.5 has become one of the top-performing models for us by combining low latency with natural pacing… helping us deliver strong voice quality across a growing set of languages where other models often fall short.”
Lydia Zarcone
Voice Product Manager
“We didn’t switch to Sonic 3.5 because it was incrementally better, we switched because nothing else came close… we’ve seen a 2.9% lift in our conversion and a 12.2% increase in customer engagement.”
Akshay Ramaswamy
Staff Product Manager
Frequently asked questions
Capabilities