Voyage 3.5 Lite vs OpenAI text-embedding-3-large

Detailed comparison between Voyage 3.5 Lite and OpenAI text-embedding-3-large. See which embedding best meets your accuracy and performance needs.

Model Comparison

OpenAI text-embedding-3-large takes the lead.

Both Voyage 3.5 Lite and OpenAI text-embedding-3-large are powerful embedding models designed to improve retrieval quality in RAG applications. However, their performance characteristics differ in important ways.

Why OpenAI text-embedding-3-large:

  • OpenAI text-embedding-3-large has 36 higher ELO rating
  • OpenAI text-embedding-3-large has a 11.3% higher win rate

Overview

Key metrics

ELO Rating

Overall ranking quality

Voyage 3.5 Lite

1503

OpenAI text-embedding-3-large

1539

Win Rate

Head-to-head performance

Voyage 3.5 Lite

44.4%

OpenAI text-embedding-3-large

55.7%

Accuracy (nDCG@10)

Ranking quality metric

Voyage 3.5 Lite

0.803

OpenAI text-embedding-3-large

0.811

Average Latency

Response time

Voyage 3.5 Lite

11ms

OpenAI text-embedding-3-large

11ms

Visual Performance Analysis

Performance

ELO Rating Comparison

Win/Loss/Tie Breakdown

Accuracy Across Datasets (nDCG@10)

Latency Distribution (ms)

Breakdown

How the models stack up

MetricVoyage 3.5 LiteOpenAI text-embedding-3-largeDescription
Overall Performance
ELO Rating
1503
1539
Overall ranking quality based on pairwise comparisons
Win Rate
44.4%
55.7%
Percentage of comparisons won against other models
Pricing & Availability
Price per 1M tokens
$0.020
$0.130
Cost per million tokens processed
Dimensions
512
3072
Vector embedding dimensions (lower is more efficient)
Release Date
2025-05-20
2024-01-25
Model release date
Accuracy Metrics
Avg nDCG@10
0.803
0.811
Normalized discounted cumulative gain at position 10
Performance Metrics
Avg Latency
11ms
11ms
Average response time across all datasets

Dataset Performance

By field

Comprehensive comparison of accuracy metrics (nDCG, Recall) and latency percentiles for each benchmark dataset.

PG

MetricVoyage 3.5 LiteOpenAI text-embedding-3-largeDescription
Accuracy Metrics
Latency Metrics
Mean
8ms
10ms
Average response time
P50
8ms
10ms
50th percentile (median)
P90
9ms
11ms
90th percentile

business reports

MetricVoyage 3.5 LiteOpenAI text-embedding-3-largeDescription
Accuracy Metrics
Latency Metrics
Mean
7ms
10ms
Average response time
P50
7ms
10ms
50th percentile (median)
P90
8ms
12ms
90th percentile

DBPedia

MetricVoyage 3.5 LiteOpenAI text-embedding-3-largeDescription
Accuracy Metrics
nDCG@5
0.641
0.648
Ranking quality at top 5 results
nDCG@10
0.632
0.641
Ranking quality at top 10 results
Recall@5
0.219
0.255
% of relevant docs in top 5
Recall@10
0.367
0.377
% of relevant docs in top 10
Latency Metrics
Mean
6ms
8ms
Average response time
P50
6ms
8ms
50th percentile (median)
P90
7ms
9ms
90th percentile

FiQa

MetricVoyage 3.5 LiteOpenAI text-embedding-3-largeDescription
Accuracy Metrics
nDCG@5
0.708
0.730
Ranking quality at top 5 results
nDCG@10
0.736
0.752
Ranking quality at top 10 results
Recall@5
0.687
0.700
% of relevant docs in top 5
Recall@10
0.780
0.781
% of relevant docs in top 10
Latency Metrics
Mean
16ms
10ms
Average response time
P50
16ms
9ms
50th percentile (median)
P90
19ms
11ms
90th percentile

SciFact

MetricVoyage 3.5 LiteOpenAI text-embedding-3-largeDescription
Accuracy Metrics
nDCG@5
0.670
0.726
Ranking quality at top 5 results
nDCG@10
0.719
0.761
Ranking quality at top 10 results
Recall@5
0.718
0.768
% of relevant docs in top 5
Recall@10
0.843
0.863
% of relevant docs in top 10
Latency Metrics
Mean
12ms
11ms
Average response time
P50
11ms
11ms
50th percentile (median)
P90
13ms
13ms
90th percentile

MSMARCO

MetricVoyage 3.5 LiteOpenAI text-embedding-3-largeDescription
Accuracy Metrics
nDCG@5
0.994
1.000
Ranking quality at top 5 results
nDCG@10
0.995
1.000
Ranking quality at top 10 results
Recall@5
0.122
0.123
% of relevant docs in top 5
Recall@10
0.222
0.224
% of relevant docs in top 10
Latency Metrics
Mean
10ms
8ms
Average response time
P50
10ms
8ms
50th percentile (median)
P90
11ms
9ms
90th percentile

NorQuAD

MetricVoyage 3.5 LiteOpenAI text-embedding-3-largeDescription
Accuracy Metrics
Latency Metrics
Mean
18ms
14ms
Average response time
P50
18ms
14ms
50th percentile (median)
P90
21ms
16ms
90th percentile

ARCD

MetricVoyage 3.5 LiteOpenAI text-embedding-3-largeDescription
Accuracy Metrics
nDCG@5
0.928
0.899
Ranking quality at top 5 results
nDCG@10
0.935
0.899
Ranking quality at top 10 results
Recall@5
0.960
0.940
% of relevant docs in top 5
Recall@10
0.980
0.940
% of relevant docs in top 10
Latency Metrics
Mean
13ms
14ms
Average response time
P50
13ms
14ms
50th percentile (median)
P90
15ms
16ms
90th percentile

Explore More

Compare more embeddings

See how all embedding models stack up. Compare OpenAI, Cohere, Jina AI, Voyage, and more. View comprehensive benchmarks, compare performance metrics, and find the perfect embedding for your RAG application.