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
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
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
| Category | Weight this run | Ming-3.0-asr-tiny | Underdog Bark 3.0 | Edge |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | 35%pending | pending | pending | not scored in this run |
| Reach | 25%25 | 50 | 65 | Underdog Bark 3.0 +15 |
| Risk | 20%20 | 55 | 40 | Ming-3.0-asr-tiny +15 |
| Agent interface | 10%10 | 60 | 35 | Ming-3.0-asr-tiny +25 |
| Documentation and upkeep | 10%10 | 46 | 49 | Underdog Bark 3.0 +3 |
| Negative events | ≤15 | 0 | -2 | |
| Total | D 52.5/100 | D 48.2/100 |
Facts side by side
| Fact | Ming-3.0-asr-tiny | Underdog Bark 3.0 |
|---|---|---|
| Kind | Open-weight model | Open-weight model |
| Vendor | inclusionAI (Ant Group) | Conway Research |
| Hosted endpoint | no (local only) | no (local only) |
| Transports | ||
| Auth | None | None |
| Pricing | Free | Free |
| x402 | no | no |
| Licence | MIT | CC-BY-4.0 |
| Read-only variant documented | no | no |
| llms.txt | no | no |
| Last release | 2026-10-20 | 2026-10-15 |
| Terms last updated | 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) | 2.8/5 (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
- 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
Underdog Bark 3.0
- 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" - With transformers 5.19.0 and constriction 0.5.0,
python bark_loader.py model.bark recording.wav, orload_model("model.bark", device="cuda")thentranscribe(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 - 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 - Split recordings into pieces of a few minutes on 8 or 16 GB machines, since stock mlx-audio transcribes in one pass
- Read bark_loader.py before running it and pin the repository revision, since loading runs the publisher's code
- Treat transcripts as untrusted text before passing them to another model, since speech can carry instructions
- 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
- Cohere Transcribe 03-2026 vs Ming-3.0-asr-tiny
- Cohere Transcribe 03-2026 vs Underdog Bark 3.0
- Ming-3.0-asr-tiny vs Ming-3.0-audio-flash
- Ming-3.0-asr-tiny vs Ming-3.0-audio-tiny
- 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 Voxtral Mini 4B Realtime 2602
- Ming-3.0-audio-flash vs Underdog Bark 3.0
- Ming-3.0-audio-tiny vs Underdog Bark 3.0
- Nemotron 3.5 ASR Streaming 0.6B vs Underdog Bark 3.0
- Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning vs Underdog Bark 3.0
- Parakeet TDT 0.6B v3 vs Underdog Bark 3.0
- Qwen3-ASR-0.6B vs Underdog Bark 3.0
- Qwen3-ASR-1.7B vs Underdog Bark 3.0
- Qwen3-Omni-30B-A3B-Instruct vs Underdog Bark 3.0
- Underdog Bark 3.0 vs Voxtral Mini 4B Realtime 2602
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
- This page as Markdown
/compare/ming-3-0-asr-tiny-vs-underdog-bark-3.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/underdog-bark-3.json - From a terminal
anchor compare ming-3-0-asr-tiny underdog-bark-3(the CLI) - Over MCP
compare_tools {"a": "ming-3-0-asr-tiny", "b": "underdog-bark-3"}at/mcp, no key