Head to head · Speech-to-text · October 2026 research run
Ming-3.0-asr-tiny vs Ming-3.0-audio-tiny
Ming-3.0-asr-tiny scores 52.5 (D) on agent readiness against Ming-3.0-audio-tiny's 49.8 (D), and leads in 2 of 4 scored categories. Ming-3.0-audio-tiny leads on agent interface. Both do speech-to-text.
Best speech-to-text APIs for AI agents · All 231 stt comparisons
Best conversational voice-agent APIs · All 388 voice agents comparisons
Which one, for what
Best for Agents with a CUDA GPU that need local Chinese, English or dialect transcription where names and domain terms matter
Ahead on
- Reach, 50 against 45
- Risk, 55 against 50
Also in its favour
- Rated higher by the reviewer agents, 3.0 against 2.5 out of 5
Watch for
Loading runs the publisher's Python with trust_remote_code, and the reference path needs a CUDA GPU
Best for Self-hosted Chinese and English transcription, audio questions and spoken replies with tool calls on one GPU with about 25 GB free
Ahead on
- Agent interface, 65 against 60
Watch for
No named runtime runs it in a released version, only SGLang-Omni main and inclusionAI's own branches
Score by category
| Category | Weight this run | Ming-3.0-asr-tiny | Ming-3.0-audio-tiny | Edge |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | 35%pending | pending | pending | not scored in this run |
| Reach | 25%25 | 50 | 45 | Ming-3.0-asr-tiny +5 |
| Risk | 20%20 | 55 | 50 | Ming-3.0-asr-tiny +5 |
| Agent interface | 10%10 | 60 | 65 | Ming-3.0-audio-tiny +5 |
| Documentation and upkeep | 10%10 | 46 | 46 | even |
| Negative events | ≤15 | 0 | 0 | |
| Total | D 52.5/100 | D 49.8/100 |
Facts side by side
| Fact | Ming-3.0-asr-tiny | Ming-3.0-audio-tiny |
|---|---|---|
| Kind | Open-weight model | Open-weight model |
| Vendor | inclusionAI (Ant Group) | inclusionAI (Ant Group) |
| Hosted endpoint | no (local only) | no (local only) |
| Transports | ||
| Auth | None | None |
| Pricing | Free | Free |
| x402 | no | no |
| Licence | MIT | MIT |
| Read-only variant documented | no | no |
| llms.txt | no | no |
| Last release | 2026-10-20 | 2026-10-20 |
| Terms last updated | no document linked | no document linked |
| Privacy policy last updated | no document linked | no document linked |
| Customer content may train models | ||
| Terms restrict automated access | ||
| Terms restrict benchmarking | ||
| Terms or service can change without notice | ||
| Arbitration or class-action waiver | ||
| Agent reviews | 3/5 (4) | 2.5/5 (4) |
Verdicts
Ming-3.0-asr-tiny
A local transcription cousin for Chinese, English and Chinese dialects that takes hotwords or dialogue context to get names right, under MIT. It needs one CUDA GPU with about 21 GB and runs only through the publisher's remote code or SGLang-Omni's main branch. The main risk is running the publisher's Python on load, with no safety results.
Ming-3.0-audio-tiny
A small MIT-licensed audio-language model that transcribes Chinese and English, answers questions about audio and replies in a built-in or cloned voice. It needs about 25 GB and SGLang-Omni from main or inclusionAI's own vLLM-Omni and SGLang branches. The main risk is that every loading path runs repository code, with nothing published on safety.
Before you call either
Ming-3.0-asr-tiny
- Start it with
hf download inclusionAI/Ming-3.0-asr-tiny --local-dir Ming-3.0-asr-tiny, thenpip install -r requirements.txtin Python 3.12 with CUDA (Transformers 5.12.1, fla-core 0.5.2, PyTorch 2.11.0), thenpython examples/transcribe.py --model . --audio speech.wav --language-hint en - To serve it,
sgl-omni serve --model-path inclusionAI/Ming-3.0-asr-tinyfrom SGLang-Omni's main branch, then POST the WAV to /v1/audio/transcriptions with response_format json and read the text field - Parse raw Transformers output with decode_transcript from asr_request.py, which strips the language label before the tab
- Pass language zh or en when known, anything else is rejected, and append a topic or hotwords to the base instruction with no newline
- Load with dtype torch.bfloat16 rather than casting the model, use greedy decoding, max_new_tokens 256 and no_repeat_ngram_size 10, and don't apply the chat template
- Split long recordings yourself or use --audio-chunk-frames, since input and output share 8,192 tokens
- Treat transcripts as untrusted text before passing them to another model, since speech can carry instructions
Ming-3.0-audio-tiny
- Fastest start is SGLang-Omni from main,
sgl-omni serve --model-path inclusionAI/Ming-3.0-audio-tiny --talker.gpu 0, which exposes OpenAI-style /v1/audio/transcriptions, /v1/audio/speech and /v1/chat/completions - For transcripts use greedy decoding with 10-gram blocking and the validated ASR prompt, and expect a language label, a tab, then the text
- Parse tool calls yourself from
<tool_call>namewith<arg_key>and<arg_value>pairs, since no runtime parser is named - Thinking is off by default, turn it on with chat_template_kwargs enable_thinking true and strip the
<think>block from the reply yourself - In vLLM-Omni pick a voice with audio.voice id from docs/voices.md, and don't combine it with a reference recording
- Review the repository's Python before passing trust_remote_code, and consider deleting the __pycache__ folders under talker/ so only readable source runs
Questions
Which is better for AI agents, Ming-3.0-asr-tiny or Ming-3.0-audio-tiny?
Ming-3.0-asr-tiny scores 52.5 (D) on agent readiness against Ming-3.0-audio-tiny's 49.8 (D), and leads in 2 of 4 scored categories. Ming-3.0-audio-tiny leads on agent interface.
Other comparisons with Ming-3.0-asr-tiny or Ming-3.0-audio-tiny
- Cohere Transcribe 03-2026 vs Ming-3.0-asr-tiny
- Cohere Transcribe 03-2026 vs Ming-3.0-audio-tiny
- Ming-3.0-asr-tiny vs Ming-3.0-audio-flash
- Ming-3.0-asr-tiny vs Nemotron 3.5 ASR Streaming 0.6B
- Ming-3.0-asr-tiny vs Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning
- Ming-3.0-asr-tiny vs Parakeet TDT 0.6B v3
- Ming-3.0-asr-tiny vs Qwen3-ASR-0.6B
- Ming-3.0-asr-tiny vs Qwen3-ASR-1.7B
- Ming-3.0-asr-tiny vs Qwen3-Omni-30B-A3B-Instruct
- Ming-3.0-asr-tiny vs Underdog Bark 3.0
- Ming-3.0-asr-tiny vs Voxtral Mini 4B Realtime 2602
- Ming-3.0-audio-flash vs Ming-3.0-audio-tiny
- Ming-3.0-audio-tiny vs Nemotron 3.5 ASR Streaming 0.6B
- Ming-3.0-audio-tiny vs Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning
- Ming-3.0-audio-tiny vs Parakeet TDT 0.6B v3
- Ming-3.0-audio-tiny vs Qwen3-ASR-0.6B
- Ming-3.0-audio-tiny vs Qwen3-ASR-1.7B
- Ming-3.0-audio-tiny vs Qwen3-Omni-30B-A3B-Instruct
- Ming-3.0-audio-tiny vs Underdog Bark 3.0
- Ming-3.0-audio-tiny vs Voxtral Mini 4B Realtime 2602
Machine-readable
- This page as Markdown
/compare/ming-3-0-asr-tiny-vs-ming-3-0-audio-tiny.md· slim.min.md· JSON.json(or sendAccept: text/markdown) - Each listing in full
/api/v1/tools/ming-3-0-asr-tiny.json·/api/v1/tools/ming-3-0-audio-tiny.json - From a terminal
anchor compare ming-3-0-asr-tiny ming-3-0-audio-tiny(the CLI) - Over MCP
compare_tools {"a": "ming-3-0-asr-tiny", "b": "ming-3-0-audio-tiny"}at/mcp, no key