Voyage 3.5 vs Cohere Embed Multilingual v3

Detailed comparison between Voyage 3.5 and Cohere Embed Multilingual v3. See which embedding best meets your accuracy and performance needs.

Model Comparison

Voyage 3.5 takes the lead.

Both Voyage 3.5 and Cohere Embed Multilingual v3 are powerful embedding models designed to improve retrieval quality in RAG applications. However, their performance characteristics differ in important ways.

Why Voyage 3.5:

  • Voyage 3.5 has 15 higher ELO rating
  • Voyage 3.5 delivers better accuracy (nDCG@10: 0.816 vs 0.781)
  • Cohere Embed Multilingual v3 is 11346ms faster on average
  • Voyage 3.5 has a 5.9% higher win rate

Overview

Key metrics

ELO Rating

Overall ranking quality

Voyage 3.5

1515

Cohere Embed Multilingual v3

1501

Win Rate

Head-to-head performance

Voyage 3.5

48.8%

Cohere Embed Multilingual v3

42.9%

Accuracy (nDCG@10)

Ranking quality metric

Voyage 3.5

0.816

Cohere Embed Multilingual v3

0.781

Average Latency

Response time

Voyage 3.5

35370ms

Cohere Embed Multilingual v3

24024ms

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 3.5Cohere Embed Multilingual v3Description
Overall Performance
ELO Rating
1515
1501
Overall ranking quality based on pairwise comparisons
Win Rate
48.8%
42.9%
Percentage of comparisons won against other models
Pricing & Availability
Price per 1M tokens
$0.060
$0.100
Cost per million tokens processed
Release Date
2025-05-20
2024-02-07
Model release date
Accuracy Metrics
Avg nDCG@10
0.816
0.781
Normalized discounted cumulative gain at position 10
Performance Metrics
Avg Latency
35370ms
24024ms
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 3.5Cohere Embed Multilingual v3Description
Accuracy Metrics
Latency Metrics
Mean
58887ms
37785ms
Average response time
P50
57709ms
37029ms
50th percentile (median)
P90
67720ms
43453ms
90th percentile

business reports

MetricVoyage 3.5Cohere Embed Multilingual v3Description
Accuracy Metrics
Latency Metrics
Mean
13273ms
5204ms
Average response time
P50
13008ms
5100ms
50th percentile (median)
P90
15264ms
5985ms
90th percentile

DBPedia

MetricVoyage 3.5Cohere Embed Multilingual v3Description
Accuracy Metrics
nDCG@5
0.655
0.619
Ranking quality at top 5 results
nDCG@10
0.637
0.591
Ranking quality at top 10 results
Recall@5
0.246
0.222
% of relevant docs in top 5
Recall@10
0.366
0.329
% of relevant docs in top 10
Latency Metrics
Mean
31763ms
33570ms
Average response time
P50
31128ms
32899ms
50th percentile (median)
P90
36527ms
38606ms
90th percentile

FiQa

MetricVoyage 3.5Cohere Embed Multilingual v3Description
Accuracy Metrics
nDCG@5
0.721
0.637
Ranking quality at top 5 results
nDCG@10
0.741
0.654
Ranking quality at top 10 results
Recall@5
0.715
0.621
% of relevant docs in top 5
Recall@10
0.793
0.692
% of relevant docs in top 10
Latency Metrics
Mean
47784ms
37581ms
Average response time
P50
46828ms
36829ms
50th percentile (median)
P90
54952ms
43218ms
90th percentile

SciFact

MetricVoyage 3.5Cohere Embed Multilingual v3Description
Accuracy Metrics
nDCG@5
0.723
0.723
Ranking quality at top 5 results
nDCG@10
0.751
0.732
Ranking quality at top 10 results
Recall@5
0.778
0.808
% of relevant docs in top 5
Recall@10
0.853
0.833
% of relevant docs in top 10
Latency Metrics
Mean
68375ms
39542ms
Average response time
P50
67008ms
38751ms
50th percentile (median)
P90
78631ms
45473ms
90th percentile

MSMARCO

MetricVoyage 3.5Cohere Embed Multilingual v3Description
Accuracy Metrics
nDCG@5
1.000
0.996
Ranking quality at top 5 results
nDCG@10
1.000
0.994
Ranking quality at top 10 results
Recall@5
0.123
0.122
% of relevant docs in top 5
Recall@10
0.224
0.218
% of relevant docs in top 10
Latency Metrics
Mean
48284ms
32380ms
Average response time
P50
47318ms
31732ms
50th percentile (median)
P90
55527ms
37237ms
90th percentile

NorQuAD

MetricVoyage 3.5Cohere Embed Multilingual v3Description
Accuracy Metrics
Latency Metrics
Mean
7770ms
3824ms
Average response time
P50
7615ms
3748ms
50th percentile (median)
P90
8936ms
4398ms
90th percentile

ARCD

MetricVoyage 3.5Cohere Embed Multilingual v3Description
Accuracy Metrics
nDCG@5
0.950
0.925
Ranking quality at top 5 results
nDCG@10
0.950
0.933
Ranking quality at top 10 results
Recall@5
0.980
0.940
% of relevant docs in top 5
Recall@10
0.980
0.960
% of relevant docs in top 10
Latency Metrics
Mean
6825ms
2305ms
Average response time
P50
6689ms
2259ms
50th percentile (median)
P90
7849ms
2651ms
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.