語音與即時代理的最低延遲推論 API:以首次Token時間(TTFT)為優先的基準測試

2026年8月30日 21:24
站內 AI 整理稿

Time to first token (TTFT) is the metric teams use to pick an inference API for voice.It is also the metric that misleads them.TTFT marks when generation starts; a text-to-speech model cannot speak until a full clause arrives.

Between those two points sits the difference between an agent that feels conversational and one that gets interrupted.This piece benchmarks every layer of the voice stack including LLM, speech-to-text, text-to-speech, and speech-to-speech.

Why TTFT Is the Right Entry Point and the Wrong Finish Line A voice agent is a latency budget with a language model inside it.Every stage spends milliseconds the user can hear.Time to first token (TTFT) is the interval between sending an inference request and receiving the first token back.

IBM’s definition frames it as the moment a system transitions from idle to visibly active.For chat, TTFT is close to the whole story.For voice, it is one term in a sum.The reason is mechanical.A text-to-speech model cannot synthesize half a word.

It needs a complete clause or sentence before it produces audio.LiveKit calls the resulting metric time-to-first-sentence (TTFS), and argues in its Gemma 4 deployment post that TTFS is what users actually feel.That gives you two knobs rather than one.TTFT controls when generation starts.

Tokens per second controls how fast the first sentence completes.A provider that wins one and loses the other will not feel fast.

The Latency Budget: What One Voice Turn Actually Costs LiveKit’s voice agents overview breaks a turn into STT at roughly 100–200ms, LLM at 300–500ms with streaming, TTS at 100–200ms, and network at 50–150ms over WebRTC.It puts the practical end-to-end target at 700ms to 1.2s.

Kwindla Hultman Kramer, co-creator of Pipecat, has advised targeting 800ms median voice-to-voice latency, with a looser 1,500ms acceptable for a proof of concept.

His rough arithmetic splits that four ways at roughly 200ms each: transport and media processing, STT plus phrase endpointing, LLM inference, and TTS.Daily’s earlier work on the fastest voice bot supplies the human baseline.Typical human response time in conversation is around 500ms.

Pauses beyond 800ms start to feel unnatural.Daily’s February 2026 voice-agent LLM benchmark translates that into an LLM requirement directly.

Natural conversation needs voice-to-voice under 1,500ms, which works out to roughly 700ms of TTFT budget for a text-mode LLM inside a transcription-to-LLM-to-voice harness.That 700ms number is the bar to hold every provider against.

How to Read a TTFT Benchmark Without Being Misled Before the tables, five methodology facts that change what the numbers mean: 1.Workload shape dominates: Artificial Analysis changed its default workload in March 2026.The site now reports 10k input token prompts rather than 1k.

Longer prompts raise both TTFT and output speed.LiveKit argues this is closer to reality for voice, because production agents front-load policy, persona, escalation rules, retrieved data, and tool schemas.2.

Server location is baked in: Artificial Analysis tests from a virtual machine in Google Cloud’s us-central1-a zone.It states plainly that TTFT includes network latency and may advantage or disadvantage providers based on where they serve.3.

Reasoning tokens count: In the Artificial Analysis definition, TTFT for a reasoning model is the first reasoning token, not the first answer token.Those are separate columns.4.Measure from the receiving side: Daily notes that model providers sometimes quote TTFT internal to their inference stacks.

Daily measures from request send to first usable token off the API.5.Runs are not repeatable: Daily is blunt about this: TTFT varies substantially between benchmark runs, and providers change inference stacks and sometimes weights without changing model names.

Layer 1: LLM Time to First Token Figures below are from the Artificial Analysis API providers leaderboard, retrieved August 30, 2026.The “first chunk” column is TTFT.Workload is 10k input tokens, single prompt, median over 72 hours.

Lowest measured first-chunk latency ProviderModelTTFTOutput speedBasetengpt-oss-120b (high)0.23s266 tok/sBasetengpt-oss-120b (low)0.24s271 tok/sDeepInfraNemotron 3 Ultra0.28s371 tok/sCohereNorth Mini Code0.32s104 tok/sCohereCommand A+0.40s239 tok/sBasetenInkling Small0.

42s337 tok/sModularGemma 4 31B (NVFP4)0.44s243 tok/sNebiusGLM-5.3-Flash0.46s206 tok/sFireworksNemotron 3.5 Lightning0.46s501 tok/sTogether AIKimi K2.7 Code0.47s245 tok/sCerebrasgpt-oss-120b (high)0.

49s1,697 tok/s The throughput trap Silicon vendors optimize for a different metric than voice agents need.ProviderModelTTFTOutput speedCerebrasgpt-oss-120b (high)0.49s1,697 tok/sCelerisCeleris-10.62s1,612 tok/sCerebrasGemma 4 31B0.53s1,351 tok/sGroqgpt-oss-20b (high)0.

82s957 tok/sSambaNovagpt-oss-120b (high)0.92s706 tok/sGroqgpt-oss-120b (low)0.69s473 tok/sInceptionMercury 23.07s770 tok/s Mercury 2 is the clearest illustration.It is a diffusion-based language model, and it generates 770 tokens per second.Its first chunk arrives at 3.07s.

That is four times the entire LLM budget for a natural conversation.Cerebras and Groq are a different case.Their TTFT is respectable and their throughput is exceptional.For TTFS specifically, that combination is strong, because the sentence completes almost immediately after the first token lands.

Frontier and proprietary endpoints ProviderModelTTFTOutput speedAmazon BedrockGPT-5.6 Luna (non-reasoning)0.59s181 tok/sAmazon BedrockGPT-5.6 Terra (non-reasoning)0.72s103 tok/sOpenAIGPT-5.6 Luna (non-reasoning)0.74s113 tok/sGoogleGemini 3.7 Flash (low), AI Studio0.84s315 tok/sAnthropicClaude 4.

5 Haiku (non-reasoning)0.84s82 tok/sAmazon BedrockNova Micro0.86s264 tok/sGoogleGemini 3.5 Flash (minimal), AI Studio0.90s202 tok/sOpenAIGPT-5.6 Sol (non-reasoning)1.06s71 tok/s Note the same model on different hosts.GPT-5.6 Luna non-reasoning measures 0.59s on Amazon Bedrock and 0.

74s on OpenAI’s own API.Hosting and routing matter as much as the weights.The vendor-measured outlier LiveKit publishes TTFT figures for its own inference product.Gemma 4 31B on LiveKit Inference measured 192ms, against Gemini 2.5 Flash at 911ms, GPT-5.5 at 966ms, GPT-4.

1 at 1,006ms, and the same Gemma 4 31B via OpenRouter at 1,876ms.LiveKit is transparent about the mechanism, which makes the claim more credible than most.It runs Gemma behind SGLang with speculative decoding, and deliberately under-packs each GPU so queueing delay stays low.

A warm request, it says, starts returning tokens in around 100ms.The tradeoff is cost, at $1.20 per 1M output tokens.The same post reports TTFS across full conversations: 354ms for Gemma 4 31B on LiveKit, 1,034ms for Gemini 2.5 Flash, 1,088ms for GPT-4.1, 1,267ms for Gemini 3.

0 Flash, and 1,404ms for GPT-5.5.Capability numbers accompany it.On IFBench, independently scored by Artificial Analysis, Gemma 4 31B scores 75.6% against GPT-5.5 at 75.9%, GPT-4.1 at 43%, and Gemini 2.5 Flash at 39%.On τ²-bench, GPT-5.5 leads at 93.9% with Gemma 4 31B at 76.9%.

Layer 2: Speech-to-Text and Turn Detection For voice, STT latency is not transcription speed.It is how long after the user stops talking the pipeline knows the user stopped talking.

Artificial Analysis measures two things on its streaming STT leaderboard, both starting from a SileroVAD-detected end of speech: time to first partial transcript, and time to final transcript.

Its AA-WER Streaming index draws on roughly 8 hours of audio, weighted AA-AgentTalk 50%, VoxPopuli 25%, Earnings-22 25%.

Vendor-published latency figures: ModelClaimSource typeDeepgram Flux~260ms p50 end-of-turn detection at defaultsVendor docsDeepgram Nova-3Sub-300ms streaming latencyVendor docsAssemblyAI Universal-Streaming~300ms immutable word emissionVendorCartesia Ink-2100ms transcript latencyVendorSpeechmatics Voice SDK0.

451 ± 0.022s end-of-speech to finalsVendor internal tool Deepgram Flux is the most architecturally inter

Related

相關文章

量子位生成式AI

「GPT-6」灰測demo刷屏!週四發佈在即

OpenAI傳聞中的旗艦模型「Astra」疑似即為GPT-6,近期流出內部測試demo,展示驚人的3D資產生成能力,包含可演奏的鋼琴與細節完整的城堡,社群反應熱烈,但官方尚未證實。該模型原定8月推出,因安全疑慮而延期,如今傳出最快將於本週四(9月3日)正式發布。

剛剛
IT之家生成式AI

騰訊混元:Hy4 preview 調用激增,WorkBuddy 已緊急擴容

作者:浩渺 責編:浩渺 評論: 感謝網友 不一樣的體驗、files、麻辣清補涼 的線索投遞!8 月 31 日消息,騰訊混元今日發文稱,自 2026 年 8 月 28 日混元 Hy4 preview 在 WorkBuddy 首發接入以來,憑藉其 Agent 能力的顯著提升,受到了廣大用戶與開發者的積極體驗和熱情反饋,上線首日即在 WorkBuddy 任務隊列中出現排隊情況,對此深表歉意。

剛剛
鈦媒體生成式AI

上線一月,Seedance 2.5能否抗住“平替”圍攻?

Tech星球2026.08.31 11:24 · 來自北京全文3579字00:00 / 10:35平替扎堆來襲,Seedance 正在遭遇什麼? 文 | Tech星球,作者 | 翟元元字節跳動旗下視頻生成大模型Seedance 2.5上線近一個月,用戶對它的評價呈兩極分化:一種聲音認為它價格太貴,生成一段十幾秒的視頻最後需要幾十塊,對個人創作者而言門檻過高,貴是原罪。另一種聲音則認為,它是地表最強視頻生成模型,生成效果最好,暫時無人超越,貴但好用。即便眼下Seedance 2.

剛剛

AIGC,闖進長片片場

生成式AI的創作能量已從短影音延伸至長片電影製作,實際參與前製概念圖、動態分鏡到後期特效等環節,象徵其角色從輔助工具轉為能主導風格與敘事節奏的創作夥伴。不過進入長片也面臨人物一致性、跨場景細節誤差與複雜多人互動等技術門檻,導演與剪接師須在AI的創意生成與精準敘事間取得平衡。此外,AIGC正重塑影視產業的勞動分工與成本結構,雖為獨立製片開啟新可能,也迫使從業人員重新定位價值,以原創性與手工感作為區隔平庸與傑作的關鍵。

剛剛