Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Amazon Transcribe vs Google Cloud Speech-to-Text comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Apr 6, 2025

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

Amazon Transcribe
Ranking in Speech-To-Text Services
4th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
5
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Google Cloud Speech-to-Text
Ranking in Speech-To-Text Services
3rd
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 December 2025, in the Speech-To-Text Services category, the mindshare of Amazon Transcribe is 10.9%, down from 22.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Google Cloud Speech-to-Text is 15.1%, down from 21.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Speech-To-Text Services Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Google Cloud Speech-to-Text15.1%
Amazon Transcribe10.9%
Other74.0%
Speech-To-Text Services
 

Featured Reviews

AG
Senior Software Developer at a tech vendor with 10,001+ employees
Efficient voice-to-text conversion enhances communication and advertising efforts
The valuable aspect of Amazon Transcribe is its ability to perform speech recognition and convert it into text. It's highly compatible with a serverless environment, making it easy to trigger the service and get results. Although no specific features handle diverse accents or dialects effectively, the scalability and ease of use are notable. It provides the best results for our needs, is highly scalable, and easy to manage. The service also benefits from cost savings, being a pay-as-you-go model with very reasonable pricing for audio transcription at $0.004 per second.
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

"The feature I utilized the most was transcription."
"The service also benefits from cost savings, being a pay-as-you-go model with very reasonable pricing for audio transcription at $0.004 per second."
"Amazon Transcribe helps me not to fall behind in a meeting and not know what's going on. Even if I do, I have the transcript at the end to help me figure out what was said during the meeting."
"The results I get with Transcribe are near-perfect—over 99% better than what I have experienced before."
"We don't run into any issues with bugs or glitches."
"Google Cloud Speech-to-Text sounds incredibly natural, which is impressive."
"I would suggest Google Cloud Speech-to-Text to others, primarily for the speaker diarization feature."
"You could dictate a bunch of stuff, and then you can get ChatGPT or something to clean it up."
"Google Cloud Speech-to-Text helps to keep my team more productive."
"The implementation is simple, and the outputs are very accurate and crisp."
"The product's initial setup phase is very easy."
"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."
"We've found the solution scales well."
 

Cons

"Several AWS products are originally built in English and not in other languages. There is room for improvement in creating more products in Spanish for Spanish-speaking countries."
"There is a need to improve the processing of background noise. Sometimes, surrounding sounds are recorded and Amazon Transcribe does not process these well, creating clutter."
"The UX and UI could be improved on the AWS console."
"I would love to see Amazon Transcribe have its own section or its own page about how to make adjustments if you're using it for accessibility."
"Amazon S3 offers something like uploading parts, where a large file is divided into smaller parts, uploaded faster, and later reassembled. A similar feature in Transcribe would really help, making it easier to upload large file sets without spending extra time."
"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 one thing that I find is when I often use specialized terms, and the solution doesn't know them."
"The tool's telephony model does not produce accurate results."
"Sometimes, speaker diarization is affected, leading to incorrect speaker identification."
"Google Cloud Speech-to-Text's trial experience could be improved by adding some extra minutes in the trial version."
"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 multilanguage support for the chatbot needs to be better."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I think the price on the standard is better for Amazon Transcribe than it is for Amazon Polly."
"Cost-wise, I would say it is all-inclusive in the payment made to Google."
"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."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Speech-To-Text Services solutions are best for your needs.
879,310 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
12%
University
10%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Computer Software Company
12%
Healthcare Company
8%
Comms Service Provider
8%
Manufacturing Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Amazon Transcribe?
The pay-as-you-go model is cost-effective, with pricing for audio transcription around $0.004 per second.
What needs improvement with Amazon Transcribe?
There is a need to improve the processing of background noise. Sometimes, surrounding sounds are recorded and Amazon Transcribe does not process these well, creating clutter. Adding functionality t...
What is your primary use case for Amazon Transcribe?
We are using Amazon Transcribe ( /products/amazon-transcribe-reviews ) to convert voice to text. For example, we communicate over the phone, record the call, and then convert the conversation into ...
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

Echo360, VidMob, RingDNA, Isentia
Home Depot, Paypal, Target, HSBC, McKesson
Find out what your peers are saying about Amazon Transcribe vs. Google Cloud Speech-to-Text and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.
879,310 professionals have used our research since 2012.