sovereign-asr-bench / asr-head-to-head.md
witcheer's picture
Upload asr-head-to-head.md with huggingface_hub
cfaddeb verified
|
Raw
History Blame
4.43 kB

Sovereign ASR on one RTX 5090: a 0.6B transducer beats 5-year-old Whisper-large on noisy speech — and runs 4–9× faster

Rig: one RTX 5090 32GB · parakeet.cpp (ggml, sm_120 CUDA) vs whisper.cpp · LibriSpeech test-clean / test-other, 200 utts/split (400 total) · load-once · one shared text normalizer · temp 0

Setup: Each model loads its weights once and transcribes the whole 400-utterance subset, so RTFx (real-time factor = audio-seconds processed per processing-second) measures transcription, not model load — a per-file CLI loop reloads the model every call and silently measures load time, the single most common way to publish a bogus ASR speed number. Every hypothesis and reference passes through one normalizer (lowercase, strip punctuation, fold contractions) before micro-averaged WER (total errors / total reference words — the LibriSpeech standard, not the mean of per-utterance WERs). Parakeet-TDT-0.6b-v2 (f16) runs via parakeet.cpp's native bench --manifest (TDT decoder, load reported separately); Whisper large-v3 / large-v3-turbo run via whisper.cpp's multi-file mode (one load over the whole invocation). The always-on local LLM was drained for the run; VRAM is each model's own steady-state footprint.

The board

model params WER clean WER other RTFx VRAM
parakeet-tdt-0.6b-v2 0.6B 1.49% 4.73% 451× 2.0 GB
whisper-large-v3 1.55B 1.47% 5.96% 53× 4.6 GB
whisper-large-v3-turbo 809M 1.42% 6.26% 117× 2.5 GB

The finding

On clean read speech, it's a three-way tie — all three within 0.07pts (1.42–1.49%). Clean LibriSpeech is saturated; nobody wins, and chasing that number is chasing noise.

On the harder test-other split, the 0.6B Parakeet wins decisively: 4.73% vs 5.96% (v3) vs 6.26% (turbo). The smallest model is the most noise-robust. And efficiency isn't close — Parakeet is 3.9× faster than turbo, 8.5× faster than v3, on the least VRAM of the three.

The pointed version: whisper-large-v3-turbo is Whisper's own speed variant, and Parakeet beats it on every axis — faster and more accurate on noise. The only place anything edges Parakeet is full v3 on clean speech, by 0.02pts, at 8.5× the compute and 2.2× the VRAM.

Mechanism

Whisper (2022) is an attention encoder-decoder; Parakeet is a TDT transducer (token-and-duration), frame-synchronous decoding built for streaming throughput — that architecture is where the 451× RTFx comes from. The interesting part is the accuracy: at 0.6B, Parakeet is not under-capacity for English read speech — it's right-sized, so it gives up nothing on noise while running an order of magnitude faster. Turbo, by contrast, buys its speed by cutting Whisper's decoder stack (32 → 4 layers) and pays for it on the hard split (6.26%, the worst here). Same "small + specialized beats big + general" result the rig keeps hitting elsewhere.

Honest caveats

  • 200 utts/split is a directional subset, not the full test-other (2,939 utts). The 1.2pt noise gap is real on this sample, but a full run would tighten the interval — treat the ranking as solid and the exact margin as provisional.
  • English-only. Parakeet-TDT is monolingual; Whisper-large is multilingual + can translate. This board is an English-transcription comparison, nothing more.
  • One shared normalizer, with number-words-vs-digits not reconciled — counted as errors equally for every model. A stated limitation, applied identically, so it doesn't bias the comparison.
  • Parakeet at f16 (the fair quality point against Whisper's ggml weights); quant sweep is future work.

Worth it?

Yes — Parakeet-TDT-0.6b is the sovereign ASR default on the 5090: faster, leaner, tougher on noise. Keep Whisper-large only when you need non-English or translation.


Method note: the load-once runner (scripts/asr_bench.py) and the scorer (scripts/asr_report.py, dep-free micro-WER) are in this repo; the chart is scripts/chart_asr.py.

Sources