zembed-1 vs Cohere Embed Multilingual v3

Detailed comparison between zembed-1 and Cohere Embed Multilingual v3. See which embedding best meets your accuracy and performance needs. If you want to compare these models on your data, try Agentset.

Model Comparison

zembed-1 takes the lead.

Both zembed-1 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 zembed-1:

  • zembed-1 has 76 higher ELO rating
  • Cohere Embed Multilingual v3 delivers better accuracy (nDCG@10: 0.701 vs 0.619)
  • Cohere Embed Multilingual v3 is 243ms faster on average
  • zembed-1 has a 10.8% higher win rate

Overview

Key metrics

ELO Rating

Overall ranking quality

zembed-1

1595

Cohere Embed Multilingual v3

1519

Win Rate

Head-to-head performance

zembed-1

59.2%

Cohere Embed Multilingual v3

48.4%

Accuracy (nDCG@10)

Ranking quality metric

zembed-1

0.619

Cohere Embed Multilingual v3

0.701

Average Latency

Response time

zembed-1

250ms

Cohere Embed Multilingual v3

7ms

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

Metriczembed-1Cohere Embed Multilingual v3Description
Overall Performance
ELO Rating
1595
1519
Overall ranking quality based on pairwise comparisons
Win Rate
59.2%
48.4%
Percentage of comparisons won against other models
Pricing & Availability
Price per 1M tokens
$0.050
$0.100
Cost per million tokens processed
Dimensions
2048
512
Vector embedding dimensions (lower is more efficient)
Release Date
2026-03-02
2024-02-07
Model release date
Accuracy Metrics
Avg nDCG@10
0.619
0.701
Normalized discounted cumulative gain at position 10
Performance Metrics
Avg Latency
250ms
7ms
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

Metriczembed-1Cohere Embed Multilingual v3Description
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
250ms
8ms
Average response time
P50
250ms
8ms
50th percentile (median)
P90
250ms
8ms
90th percentile

DBPedia

Metriczembed-1Cohere Embed Multilingual v3Description
Accuracy Metrics
nDCG@5
0.832
0.786
Ranking quality at top 5 results
nDCG@10
0.811
0.783
Ranking quality at top 10 results
Recall@5
0.062
0.061
% of relevant docs in top 5
Recall@10
0.121
0.122
% of relevant docs in top 10
Latency Metrics
Mean
250ms
7ms
Average response time
P50
250ms
7ms
50th percentile (median)
P90
250ms
7ms
90th percentile

FiQa

Metriczembed-1Cohere Embed Multilingual v3Description
Accuracy Metrics
nDCG@5
0.862
0.804
Ranking quality at top 5 results
nDCG@10
0.855
0.812
Ranking quality at top 10 results
Recall@5
0.668
0.624
% of relevant docs in top 5
Recall@10
0.712
0.696
% of relevant docs in top 10
Latency Metrics
Mean
250ms
7ms
Average response time
P50
250ms
7ms
50th percentile (median)
P90
250ms
7ms
90th percentile

SciFact

Metriczembed-1Cohere Embed Multilingual v3Description
Accuracy Metrics
nDCG@5
0.767
0.696
Ranking quality at top 5 results
nDCG@10
0.777
0.702
Ranking quality at top 10 results
Recall@5
0.888
0.804
% of relevant docs in top 5
Recall@10
0.929
0.830
% of relevant docs in top 10
Latency Metrics
Mean
250ms
7ms
Average response time
P50
250ms
7ms
50th percentile (median)
P90
250ms
7ms
90th percentile

MSMARCO

Metriczembed-1Cohere Embed Multilingual v3Description
Accuracy Metrics
nDCG@5
0.955
0.952
Ranking quality at top 5 results
nDCG@10
0.946
0.941
Ranking quality at top 10 results
Recall@5
0.123
0.121
% of relevant docs in top 5
Recall@10
0.223
0.218
% of relevant docs in top 10
Latency Metrics
Mean
250ms
8ms
Average response time
P50
250ms
8ms
50th percentile (median)
P90
250ms
8ms
90th percentile

ARCD

Metriczembed-1Cohere Embed Multilingual v3Description
Accuracy Metrics
nDCG@5
0.851
0.868
Ranking quality at top 5 results
nDCG@10
0.858
0.875
Ranking quality at top 10 results
Recall@5
0.920
0.940
% of relevant docs in top 5
Recall@10
0.940
0.960
% of relevant docs in top 10
Latency Metrics
Mean
250ms
7ms
Average response time
P50
250ms
7ms
50th percentile (median)
P90
250ms
7ms
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.