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 is 3214ms faster on average
  • 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

36136ms

OpenAI text-embedding-3-large

32922ms

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
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
36136ms
32922ms
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
47120ms
57366ms
Average response time
P50
46178ms
56219ms
50th percentile (median)
P90
54188ms
65971ms
90th percentile

business reports

MetricVoyage 3.5 LiteOpenAI text-embedding-3-largeDescription
Accuracy Metrics
Latency Metrics
Mean
5629ms
8013ms
Average response time
P50
5516ms
7853ms
50th percentile (median)
P90
6473ms
9215ms
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
32706ms
42058ms
Average response time
P50
32052ms
41217ms
50th percentile (median)
P90
37612ms
48367ms
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
85143ms
48635ms
Average response time
P50
83440ms
47662ms
50th percentile (median)
P90
97914ms
55930ms
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
58245ms
55796ms
Average response time
P50
57080ms
54680ms
50th percentile (median)
P90
66982ms
64165ms
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
49482ms
41860ms
Average response time
P50
48492ms
41023ms
50th percentile (median)
P90
56904ms
48139ms
90th percentile

NorQuAD

MetricVoyage 3.5 LiteOpenAI text-embedding-3-largeDescription
Accuracy Metrics
Latency Metrics
Mean
7081ms
5613ms
Average response time
P50
6939ms
5501ms
50th percentile (median)
P90
8143ms
6455ms
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
3679ms
4036ms
Average response time
P50
3605ms
3955ms
50th percentile (median)
P90
4231ms
4641ms
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.