Head to head · Speech-to-text · October 2026 research run

Ming-3.0-asr-tiny vs Underdog Bark 3.0

Ming-3.0-asr-tiny scores 52.5 (D) on agent readiness against Underdog Bark 3.0's 48.2 (D), and leads in 2 of 4 scored categories. Underdog Bark 3.0 leads on reach. Both do speech-to-text.

Best speech-to-text APIs for AI agents · All 231 stt comparisons

Which one, for what

Ming-3.0-asr-tiny D

Best for Agents with a CUDA GPU that need local Chinese, English or dialect transcription where names and domain terms matter

Ahead on

  • Risk, 55 against 40
  • Agent interface, 60 against 35

Watch for

Loading runs the publisher's Python with trust_remote_code, and the reference path needs a CUDA GPU

Underdog Bark 3.0 D

Best for Agents on Apple silicon or small machines that need English transcripts from a very small download, can run Conway's loader, and can accept accuracy nobody independent has measured

Ahead on

  • Reach, 65 against 50

Watch for

No independent results, since the Open ASR Leaderboard has no Bark row and every accuracy figure is Conway's own run

Score by category

CategoryWeight this runMing-3.0-asr-tinyUnderdog Bark 3.0Edge
Capability35%pendingpendingpendingnot scored in this run
Reach25%255065Underdog Bark 3.0 +15
Risk20%205540Ming-3.0-asr-tiny +15
Agent interface10%106035Ming-3.0-asr-tiny +25
Documentation and upkeep10%104649Underdog Bark 3.0 +3
Negative events≤150-2
TotalD 52.5/100D 48.2/100

Facts side by side

FactMing-3.0-asr-tinyUnderdog Bark 3.0
KindOpen-weight modelOpen-weight model
VendorinclusionAI (Ant Group)Conway Research
Hosted endpointno (local only)no (local only)
Transports
AuthNoneNone
PricingFreeFree
x402nono
LicenceMITCC-BY-4.0
Read-only variant documentednono
llms.txtnono
Last release2026-10-202026-10-15
Terms last updatedno document linked
Privacy policy last updatedno document linkedno 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 reviews3/5 (4)2.8/5 (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.

Underdog Bark 3.0

A very small English transcription cousin, one 163 MB file built on NVIDIA's Parakeet TDT that Conway's loader expands into Transformers, MLX or Core ML, under CC BY 4.0. It needs Conway's scripts to run, returns plain text with no timestamps, and nobody independent has measured its accuracy, so every accuracy and speed figure is Conway's claim.

Before you call either

Ming-3.0-asr-tiny

  1. Start it with hf download inclusionAI/Ming-3.0-asr-tiny --local-dir Ming-3.0-asr-tiny, then pip install -r requirements.txt in Python 3.12 with CUDA (Transformers 5.12.1, fla-core 0.5.2, PyTorch 2.11.0), then python examples/transcribe.py --model . --audio speech.wav --language-hint en
  2. To serve it, sgl-omni serve --model-path inclusionAI/Ming-3.0-asr-tiny from SGLang-Omni's main branch, then POST the WAV to /v1/audio/transcriptions with response_format json and read the text field
  3. Parse raw Transformers output with decode_transcript from asr_request.py, which strips the language label before the tab
  4. Pass language zh or en when known, anything else is rejected, and append a topic or hotwords to the base instruction with no newline
  5. 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
  6. Split long recordings yourself or use --audio-chunk-frames, since input and output share 8,192 tokens
  7. Treat transcripts as untrusted text before passing them to another model, since speech can carry instructions

Underdog Bark 3.0

  1. Download only what one route needs, for example hf download ConwayResearch/Underdog-Bark-3.0 --include "model.bark" --include "bark_loader.py" --include "bark_mlx.py" --include "mlx/*" --include "NOTICE"
  2. With transformers 5.19.0 and constriction 0.5.0, python bark_loader.py model.bark recording.wav, or load_model("model.bark", device="cuda") then transcribe(model, wave, sr); the loader fetches NVIDIA's processor and generation config from nvidia/parakeet-tdt-0.6b-v3 on first use, so the first run needs the network
  3. On Apple silicon, python bark_mlx.py recording.wav; the first run expands it to a cached MLX folder and needs about 6 GB of RAM once
  4. Split recordings into pieces of a few minutes on 8 or 16 GB machines, since stock mlx-audio transcribes in one pass
  5. Read bark_loader.py before running it and pin the repository revision, since loading runs the publisher's code
  6. Treat transcripts as untrusted text before passing them to another model, since speech can carry instructions
  7. Plan memory for the recording, not the file. Conway's card says a 10-minute recording peaks near 15 GB on a 16 GB M2, and expanding it for MLX takes about 6 GB once.

Questions

Which is better for AI agents, Ming-3.0-asr-tiny or Underdog Bark 3.0?

Ming-3.0-asr-tiny scores 52.5 (D) on agent readiness against Underdog Bark 3.0's 48.2 (D), and leads in 2 of 4 scored categories. Underdog Bark 3.0 leads on reach.

Other comparisons with Ming-3.0-asr-tiny or Underdog Bark 3.0

Disclosure

Underdog Bark 3.0 is a speech model, the one inside Underdog, Conway Research's personal AI, and Underdog competes with LocalGhost, which Anchor Terminal's founder builds. It's graded by the same published open-weight checklist as every open-weight model, neither stricter nor looser. Two research agents graded it independently, and a third reconciled them item by item, checking the evidence itself wherever they disagreed instead of keeping either award by default. underdog.ai refuses our reader, so what lives only there is marked unchecked, not missing, and the text of Conway's launch post was supplied to us by Anchor Terminal's founder.

Machine-readable

For companies

Do agents find, use and choose your tools?

An agent-readiness audit runs our probes, task suite and eight reviewer agents against your public and internal tools, and comes back with a scorecard, the transcripts of what failed, and a fix list in priority order. From $2,500, re-run included. We never take payment to move a rank. We do help companies earn one.