No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

AssemblyAI vs Google Cloud Speech-to-Text comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

AssemblyAI
Ranking in Speech-To-Text Services
2nd
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
5.4
Number of Reviews
16
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Google Cloud Speech-to-Text
Ranking in Speech-To-Text Services
4th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.2
Number of Reviews
8
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of September 2026, in the Speech-To-Text Services category, the mindshare of AssemblyAI is 6.5%, down from 7.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Google Cloud Speech-to-Text is 12.8%, down from 15.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Speech-To-Text Services Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
AssemblyAI6.5%
Google Cloud Speech-to-Text12.8%
Other80.7%
Speech-To-Text Services
 

Featured Reviews

Leen Batta - PeerSpot reviewer
Full Stack Developer at a university with 10,001+ employees
Automated workflows have transformed classroom videos into instant interactive study content
While AssemblyAI performs exceptionally well, there are a few areas where the developer experience could be further improved. First, regarding native video file support, currently, developers must write custom back-end logic to extract the audio track from video files locally before uploading. If AssemblyAI supported direct native video uploads and handled the audio extraction internally on their servers, it would simplify our back-end architecture. Native real-time status updates could also be improved because while the API is highly stable, writing custom asynchronous polling loops to check transcription status adds boilerplate code. Lastly, the queue latency for micro-files could be optimized because we noticed some initial queue or warm-up latency when transcribing very short audio files under one minute.
reviewer2252211 - PeerSpot reviewer
Principal Architect & NLP Python Developer at a computer software company with 1-10 employees
Support challenges persist despite audio technology advancements
Google Cloud Speech-to-Text is not entirely accurate, so we have to correct for those errors in our AI software. It uses neural networks, and that stochastic processing is 70% to 75% accurate. It gets it wrong too often, and since I personally work with this, I don't appreciate that. However, they seem to be the best option currently. We have to write our own improvements because their tools to improve transcription accuracy in our domain aren't very powerful. The timestamp technology for recognized words is inadequate, so we don't use it. We understand words based on their meaning, and we have a whole AI engine that does that, which is one of our differentiators from a product standpoint. We didn't use the custom voice creation feature; we just use their voices, which are fine for our purposes.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"Using AssemblyAI has worked exceptionally well for me because it has helped my team input very little effort to check for quality."
"Because of AssemblyAI, we were able to envision something that could speak naturally to mass consumers."
"AssemblyAI has positively impacted my organization because our users started using the chatbot much more from the moment we implemented AssemblyAI in the streaming tool, and usage increased by 300%."
"AssemblyAI has positively impacted my organization as it is in our active pipeline, making it one of the core building blocks of our product that we are currently making."
"The primary benefit I receive from their product is much more accurate transcription; first, it is a very affordable service, and second, the accuracy is much better compared to other services such as Deepgram or AWS transcription services, which are the main benefits."
"The best features AssemblyAI offers are transcription and real-time transcriptions, and the speed of real-time transcription stands out to me because it's 20 to 40% faster than the industry benchmark, so speed is definitely one of the pros of AssemblyAI."
"I would suggest others to go for AssemblyAI because it is the best in the market in terms of accuracy, outputs, and the different languages that it caters to and transcribes."
"What stood out to me about the speech-to-text feature of AssemblyAI was the speed, accuracy, and ease of integration."
"The implementation is simple, and the outputs are very accurate and crisp."
"Google Cloud Speech-to-Text sounds incredibly natural, which is impressive."
"We've found the solution scales well."
"During the time I used Google Cloud Speech-to-Text, it was very impactful to the organization as it made our tasks much easier to perform."
"I would suggest Google Cloud Speech-to-Text to others, primarily for the speaker diarization feature."
"Creating bots helps our IT team save time."
"The product's initial setup phase is very easy."
"Google Cloud Speech-to-Text helps to keep my team more productive."
 

Cons

"AssemblyAI can be improved in several areas."
"While AssemblyAI performs exceptionally well, there are a few areas where the developer experience could be further improved."
"AssemblyAI could be improved because the accuracy drops noticeably with a heavy accent or a very fast speaker, and pricing can become expensive at a high volume, so better multi-support or more affordable enterprise pricing tiers would make it significantly more competitive."
"The only point where I think AssemblyAI can be improved is in the export functionality."
"I wish AssemblyAI could improve its multilingual support, as it did not work well when I spoke in different languages."
"AssemblyAI should respond more quickly because when I post a ticket, they take too much time to respond to it."
"AssemblyAI could be improved because when we have different accents on the same call, it usually fails, especially when we have American, Asian, and Latin American speakers on the same call, making the transcriptions a bit noisy."
"One aspect where AssemblyAI can improve is the efficiency for Indian languages, as we have seen a lack of accuracy."
"Sometimes, speaker diarization is affected, leading to incorrect speaker identification."
"Google Cloud Speech-to-Text is 100 out of 100 when it works, and when it doesn't work, which is fairly often, it gets a zero. It doesn't fail gracefully; it fails in an unexpected way."
"Given the numerous accents and dialects in India, Google Cloud Speech-to-Text could improve its handling of Indian accents."
"The tool's telephony model does not produce accurate results."
"Since it is a paid service, it is very difficult to access if a user does not have the credentials. Also, we have to create the API keys and secret keys repeatedly to maintain authentication and privacy."
"The multilanguage support for the chatbot needs to be better."
"Google Cloud Speech-to-Text's trial experience could be improved by adding some extra minutes in the trial version."
"The one thing that I find is when I often use specialized terms, and the solution doesn't know them."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"The tool's cost is also very low. The tool is cheaply priced. It charges around 0.13 INR per call with a duration of five minutes."
"Cost-wise, I would say it is all-inclusive in the payment made to Google."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Speech-To-Text Services solutions are best for your needs.
913,924 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
University
34%
Outsourcing Company
12%
Comms Service Provider
10%
Wholesaler/Distributor
8%
Computer Software Company
12%
Comms Service Provider
11%
Construction Company
6%
Manufacturing Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business11
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise7
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business5
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise1
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for AssemblyAI?
Regarding my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing, I would like to know if it can be reduced somehow, but apart from that, licensing is good enough for us.
What needs improvement with AssemblyAI?
AssemblyAI can be improved in several areas. I don't remember if AssemblyAI had a webhook, but if they have one, that's beneficial. The biggest improvement I think was the lack of background sound....
What is your primary use case for AssemblyAI?
My main use case for AssemblyAI was for a voice-based calling system that we created. A specific example of how I used AssemblyAI in my voice-based calling system is that it was used for the text-t...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Google Cloud Speech-to-Text?
Our experience with pricing and licensing for Google Cloud Speech-to-Text is that we didn't have any other viable choices, so we cannot effectively evaluate if it's well-priced or badly priced.
What needs improvement with Google Cloud Speech-to-Text?
Google Cloud Speech-to-Text is not entirely accurate, so we have to correct for those errors in our AI software. It uses neural networks, and that stochastic processing is 70% to 75% accurate. It g...
What is your primary use case for Google Cloud Speech-to-Text?
I can answer questions about my experience with SQL Server as we are trying to capture reviews for SQL Server. We don't use the reporting services within SQL Server; we're using this for heavy-duty...
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Home Depot, Paypal, Target, HSBC, McKesson
Find out what your peers are saying about AssemblyAI vs. Google Cloud Speech-to-Text and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.
913,924 professionals have used our research since 2012.