Skip to main content

DeepgramCartesiaAudio matchupSpeech to text

Fluxvs.Cartesia Ink-2

Which model is better?

Flux and Cartesia Ink-2 each lead in different tests.

Independent tests
Flux0 of 3
Cartesia Ink-20 of 3
Coval, Vals AI, Cekura
Popularity
Fluxahead37
Cartesia Ink-20
out of 100
Weights and access
Fluxproprietary
Cartesia Ink-2proprietary
Price
Fluxn/a
Cartesia Ink-23 credits per second of audio; the dollar price and overage charges depend on the plan
verbatim from the provider

Pick Flux for

leaning Cekuramore popular

Pick Cartesia Ink-2 for

leaning Vals AI

Shared tests

Independent evaluators and leaderboards only, the newest shared snapshot per evaluator. With 95 % ranges a lead counts when they do not overlap; for hit rates, when it holds in a 95 % test. Without any uncertainty figure at most “slightly ahead”.

Coval

depends on the subtest

Flux is clearly ahead in 0 of 16 subtests and slightly in 7, Cartesia Ink-2 in 0 clearly and slightly in 5. 4 are level.

Coval Word Error Rate (WER) per-sample p50

Flux3.1 %
Cartesia Ink-20.0 %

lower is better, as of November 5, 2026

Coval Time to First Token (TTFT) maximum

Flux4,616 ms
Cartesia Ink-225,200 ms

lower is better, as of November 5, 2026

Coval AudioToFinal maximum

Flux17.25 s
Cartesia Ink-239.52 s

lower is better, as of November 5, 2026

Show all 16 subtests
SubtestFluxCartesia Ink-2Verdict
Coval Word Error Rate (WER) per-sample p50 (lower is better)3.1 %0.0 %Cartesia Ink-2 slightly ahead
Coval Time to First Token (TTFT) maximum (lower is better)4,616 ms25,200 msFlux slightly ahead
Coval AudioToFinal maximum (lower is better)17.25 s39.52 sFlux slightly ahead
Coval Time to Final Segment (TTFS) maximum (lower is better)13,993 ms31,136 msFlux slightly ahead
Coval Time to First Token (TTFT) mean (lower is better)1,095 ms2,033 msFlux slightly ahead
Coval Time to First Token (TTFT) p50 (lower is better)1,172 ms2,017 msFlux slightly ahead
Coval pooled corpus Word Error Rate (WER) (lower is better)5.7 %3.4 %Cartesia Ink-2 slightly ahead
Coval Word Error Rate (WER) per-sample mean (lower is better)6.4 %3.9 %Cartesia Ink-2 slightly ahead
Coval Time to Final Segment (TTFS) mean (lower is better)102 ms145 msFlux slightly ahead
Coval Time to Final Segment (TTFS) p50 (lower is better)99 ms139 msFlux slightly ahead
Coval Word Error Rate (WER) per-sample maximum (lower is better)92.3 %69.0 %Cartesia Ink-2 slightly ahead
Coval RTF maximum (lower is better)5.294.71Cartesia Ink-2 slightly ahead
Coval RTF mean (lower is better)1.021.02level
Coval AudioToFinal p50 (lower is better)8.42 s8.46 slevel
Coval RTF p50 (lower is better)1.011.02level
Coval AudioToFinal mean (lower is better)8.05 s8.09 slevel

Source · latest November 5, 2026

Vals AI

Cartesia Ink-2 slightly ahead

Cartesia Ink-2 is clearly ahead in 0 of 3 subtests and slightly in 2, Flux in none. 1 is level.

VoiceCodeBench · Overall

Flux55.7 %
Cartesia Ink-262.0 %

as of October 31, 2026

VoiceCodeBench · CTEM

Flux86.6 %
Cartesia Ink-289.5 %

as of October 31, 2026

VoiceCodeBench · WER

Flux9.4 %
Cartesia Ink-29.2 %

lower is better, as of October 31, 2026

Source · latest October 31, 2026

Cekura

Flux slightly ahead

Final-text delay (TTFS), P50

Flux108 ms
Cartesia Ink-2123 ms

lower is better, as of October 23, 2026

Source · latest October 23, 2026

All data side by side

Prices are verbatim from the provider, because audio models bill per minute, character or token.

FluxCartesia Ink-2
TaskSpeech to textSpeech to text
DeveloperDeepgramCartesia
StatusActiveActive
Releasedn/aJuly 9, 2026
Weightsproprietaryproprietary
Runs locallynono
Pricen/a3 credits per second of audio; the dollar price and overage charges depend on the plan
Popularity (out of 100)370