Voyage 3.5 Lite vs Voyage 3 Large

Detailed comparison between Voyage 3.5 Lite and Voyage 3 Large. See which embedding best meets your accuracy and performance needs. If you want to compare these models on your data, try Agentset.

Model Comparison

Voyage 3 Large takes the lead.

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

Why Voyage 3 Large:

  • Voyage 3 Large has 45 higher ELO rating
  • Voyage 3.5 Lite delivers better accuracy (nDCG@10: 0.703 vs 0.501)
  • Voyage 3.5 Lite is 253ms faster on average
  • Voyage 3 Large has a 7.1% higher win rate

Overview

Key metrics

ELO Rating

Overall ranking quality

Voyage 3.5 Lite

1490

Voyage 3 Large

1534

Win Rate

Head-to-head performance

Voyage 3.5 Lite

44.2%

Voyage 3 Large

51.3%

Accuracy (nDCG@10)

Ranking quality metric

Voyage 3.5 Lite

0.703

Voyage 3 Large

0.501

Average Latency

Response time

Voyage 3.5 Lite

19ms

Voyage 3 Large

272ms

Embedding Models Are Just One Piece of RAG

Agentset gives you a managed RAG pipeline with the top-ranked models and best practices baked in. No infrastructure to maintain, no embeddings to manage.

Trusted by teams building production RAG applications

5M+
Documents
1,500+
Teams
99.9%
Uptime

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 LiteVoyage 3 LargeDescription
Overall Performance
ELO Rating
1490
1534
Overall ranking quality based on pairwise comparisons
Win Rate
44.2%
51.3%
Percentage of comparisons won against other models
Pricing & Availability
Price per 1M tokens
$0.020
$0.180
Cost per million tokens processed
Dimensions
512
1024
Vector embedding dimensions (lower is more efficient)
Release Date
2025-05-20
2025-01-07
Model release date
Accuracy Metrics
Avg nDCG@10
0.703
0.501
Normalized discounted cumulative gain at position 10
Performance Metrics
Avg Latency
19ms
272ms
Average response time across all datasets

Build RAG in Minutes, Not Months

Agentset gives you a complete RAG API with top-ranked embedding models and smart retrieval built in. Upload your data, call the API, and get accurate results from day one.

import { Agentset } from "agentset";

const agentset = new Agentset();
const ns = agentset.namespace("ns_1234");

const results = await ns.search(
  "What is multi-head attention?"
);

for (const result of results) {
  console.log(result.text);
}

Dataset Performance

By field

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

business reports

MetricVoyage 3.5 LiteVoyage 3 LargeDescription
Accuracy Metrics
nDCG@5
0.000
0.000
Ranking quality at top 5 results
nDCG@10
0.000
0.000
Ranking quality at top 10 results
Recall@5
0.000
0.000
% of relevant docs in top 5
Recall@10
0.000
0.000
% of relevant docs in top 10
Latency Metrics
Mean
54ms
309ms
Average response time
P50
54ms
309ms
50th percentile (median)
P90
54ms
309ms
90th percentile

DBPedia

MetricVoyage 3.5 LiteVoyage 3 LargeDescription
Accuracy Metrics
nDCG@5
0.793
0.801
Ranking quality at top 5 results
nDCG@10
0.787
0.790
Ranking quality at top 10 results
Recall@5
0.061
0.062
% of relevant docs in top 5
Recall@10
0.120
0.123
% of relevant docs in top 10
Latency Metrics
Mean
7ms
188ms
Average response time
P50
7ms
188ms
50th percentile (median)
P90
7ms
188ms
90th percentile

FiQa

MetricVoyage 3.5 LiteVoyage 3 LargeDescription
Accuracy Metrics
nDCG@5
0.812
0.000
Ranking quality at top 5 results
nDCG@10
0.796
0.000
Ranking quality at top 10 results
Recall@5
0.718
0.000
% of relevant docs in top 5
Recall@10
0.796
0.000
% of relevant docs in top 10
Latency Metrics
Mean
12ms
319ms
Average response time
P50
12ms
319ms
50th percentile (median)
P90
12ms
319ms
90th percentile

SciFact

MetricVoyage 3.5 LiteVoyage 3 LargeDescription
Accuracy Metrics
nDCG@5
0.704
0.766
Ranking quality at top 5 results
nDCG@10
0.726
0.779
Ranking quality at top 10 results
Recall@5
0.774
0.837
% of relevant docs in top 5
Recall@10
0.850
0.878
% of relevant docs in top 10
Latency Metrics
Mean
9ms
230ms
Average response time
P50
9ms
230ms
50th percentile (median)
P90
9ms
230ms
90th percentile

MSMARCO

MetricVoyage 3.5 LiteVoyage 3 LargeDescription
Accuracy Metrics
nDCG@5
0.965
0.956
Ranking quality at top 5 results
nDCG@10
0.944
0.942
Ranking quality at top 10 results
Recall@5
0.123
0.122
% of relevant docs in top 5
Recall@10
0.223
0.221
% of relevant docs in top 10
Latency Metrics
Mean
15ms
251ms
Average response time
P50
15ms
251ms
50th percentile (median)
P90
15ms
251ms
90th percentile

ARCD

MetricVoyage 3.5 LiteVoyage 3 LargeDescription
Accuracy Metrics
nDCG@5
0.874
0.898
Ranking quality at top 5 results
nDCG@10
0.874
0.905
Ranking quality at top 10 results
Recall@5
0.980
0.960
% of relevant docs in top 5
Recall@10
0.980
0.980
% of relevant docs in top 10
Latency Metrics
Mean
18ms
300ms
Average response time
P50
18ms
300ms
50th percentile (median)
P90
18ms
300ms
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.