The State of Translation Automation 2026 · Languages

English to Estonian AI translation quality, cost and speed

What it takes to automate translation from English into Estonian against 10 requirements in three levels: the solutions that meet them, what they cost and how fast they are, from the 2026 benchmark of 57 AI models and MT engines.

How good is AI translation from English to Estonian?

Key findings on English to Estonian translation

  1. 1Near missThe two-step solution (translation + post-edit) on Google Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview meets every Standard requirement but general translation quality, with 20.8 weighted errors per 1,000 words. It costs $28.69 per million characters and takes 206 seconds per 1,000 words.See the data →
  2. 2Real-timeNone of the three real-time (<2 sec) solutions on the shortlist meet general translation quality, tone of voice, terminology or tag handling. These are the one-step solutions on DeepL Next Gen, Google Translation LLM and Microsoft Translator, with 49.8 to 87.7 weighted errors per 1,000 words.See the data →
  3. 3Level step-upThe Advanced requirements remove only the three-step solution (translation + LQA + repair) on Google Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview. The one-step solution on OpenAI GPT-5.6 Sol meets them without the gender-neutrality agent, with 19.4 total errors per 1,000 words, and the three-step one on Anthropic Claude Fable 5 with 10.9.See the data →

Find English to Estonian translation solutions for your requirements

Pick a quality level, or your own requirements, bars and constraints, to see the shortlisted solutions that meet them in Estonian, with a column for each requirement you select. Under Optimize for, choose which of them comes first: the one with the fewest total errors, the lowest cost or the shortest time. Click a column heading to sort by it.

The shortlisted solutions on 12 models, with their Intento LQA results. Total errors per 1,000 words add the weighted general translation quality errors (minor 1, major 5, critical 10) to the missed glossary terms, sentences in the wrong register, tag errors and sentences that fail gender neutrality, each counted once. Formatting counts as met or missed and does not add to the total errors. The models that did not make the shortlist have automatic scores only: the shortlist. Gender neutrality: the Advanced requirements count the two best solutions of the language, with the gender-neutrality agent where they need it. The results of the other solutions are shown for information.

How we measure it: 11-01 · 11-02

Trade-offs in English to Estonian translation

Trade-off

None of the three solutions that meet every Standard requirement is ahead on errors, cost and time at once. The one-step solution on OpenAI GPT-5.6 Sol has 19.4 total errors per 1,000 words, costs $7.53 per million characters and takes 79 seconds per 1,000 words. The three-step solution (translation + LQA + repair) on Anthropic Claude Fable 5 has 10.9 total errors per 1,000 words, at $641 per million characters and 238 seconds per 1,000 words. Optimize for selects the first for cost and latency and the second for quality.

Constraints

For the Standard requirements, a cost cap from $7.54 to under $641 per million characters, a time limit from 79 to 237 seconds per 1,000 words or a limit of one or two steps leaves only the one-step solution on OpenAI GPT-5.6 Sol. With a cost cap of at most $7.53 or a time limit of at most 78 seconds, no solution meets them. A cap from 12.5 to under 19.4 total errors per 1,000 words works the other way. It leaves only the three-step solutions (translation + LQA + repair) on Anthropic Claude Fable 5 and Google Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview.

Agent effect

Both solutions that meet the Advanced requirements do so without the gender-neutrality agent, with 100% of the sentences about people gender-neutral, so the agent does not add to the cost or the time. They are the one-step solution on OpenAI GPT-5.6 Sol and the three-step solution on Anthropic Claude Fable 5, and Optimize for selects them as under the Standard requirements: the first for cost and latency, the second for quality.

English to Estonian translation quality levels

Optimize for
Basic requirements★☆☆☆☆

Tier 1: simple solution + backup

Solutions that meet them
5 (1 one-step)
Simplest solution
one-step
Fewest errors

Anthropic Claude Fable 5
three-step

Total errors per 1,000 words
10.9
Cost per million characters
$641
Seconds per 1,000 words
238
Lowest cost

OpenAI GPT-5.6 Sol
one-step LLM adjusted for Standard requirements

Total errors per 1,000 words
19.4
Cost per million characters
$7.53
Seconds per 1,000 words
79
Shortest time

OpenAI GPT-5.6 Sol
one-step LLM adjusted for Standard requirements

Total errors per 1,000 words
19.4
Cost per million characters
$7.53
Seconds per 1,000 words
79
Standard requirements★☆☆

Tier 1: simple solution + backup

Solutions that meet them
3 (1 one-step)
Simplest solution
one-step
Fewest errors

Anthropic Claude Fable 5
three-step

Total errors per 1,000 words
10.9
Cost per million characters
$641
Seconds per 1,000 words
238
Lowest cost

OpenAI GPT-5.6 Sol
one-step LLM adjusted for Standard requirements

Total errors per 1,000 words
19.4
Cost per million characters
$7.53
Seconds per 1,000 words
79
Shortest time

OpenAI GPT-5.6 Sol
one-step LLM adjusted for Standard requirements

Total errors per 1,000 words
19.4
Cost per million characters
$7.53
Seconds per 1,000 words
79
Advanced requirements★☆

Tier 1: simple solution + backup

Solutions that meet them
2 (1 one-step)
Simplest solution
one-step
Fewest errors

Anthropic Claude Fable 5
three-step

Total errors per 1,000 words
10.9
Cost per million characters
$641
Seconds per 1,000 words
238
Lowest cost

OpenAI GPT-5.6 Sol
one-step LLM adjusted for Standard requirements

Total errors per 1,000 words
19.4
Cost per million characters
$7.53
Seconds per 1,000 words
79
Shortest time

OpenAI GPT-5.6 Sol
one-step LLM adjusted for Standard requirements

Total errors per 1,000 words
19.4
Cost per million characters
$7.53
Seconds per 1,000 words
79

Optimize for selects one of the solutions that meet the level: the one with the fewest total errors, the lowest cost or the shortest time. Where no solution meets the level, the card shows the available solution with the fewest total errors and what it misses. Total errors count every requirement with countable errors.

Quality levelTierSolutionsSimplest solutionModelTotal errors per 1,000 wordsCost per million charactersSeconds per 1,000 words
BasicTier 1: simple solution + backup★ ☆×4one-stepOpenAI GPT-5.6 Sol19.4$7.5379
StandardTier 1: simple solution + backup★ ☆☆one-stepOpenAI GPT-5.6 Sol19.4$7.5379
AdvancedTier 1: simple solution + backup★ ☆one-stepOpenAI GPT-5.6 Sol19.4$7.5379

One solution per level: the simplest that meets the level, the cheapest of them where several are equally simple. ★ a one-step solution, ☆ a solution with more steps or the gender-neutrality agent.

Level step-up

The Standard requirements remove two of the five solutions that meet the Basic ones, the three-step solutions (translation + LQA + repair) on Anthropic Claude Opus 4.8 and xAI Grok 4.20 (reasoning). They have 92.6% and 92.0% of the glossary terms right, and the one on Anthropic Claude Opus 4.8 has 99.6% of the tags right. Only the one-step solution on OpenAI GPT-5.6 Sol and the three-step solution on Anthropic Claude Fable 5 meet the Advanced requirements. Optimize for selects the same solutions at all three levels.

How we measure it: 11-01 · 11-02 · 08-09

English to Estonian translation cost against errors

Chart data
Cost and weighted errors of the one-step solutions in Estonian
ModelUS dollars per million charactersWeighted errors per 1,000 wordsGroup
xAI Grok 4.20 (reasoning)1.250.8Misses a Standard requirement
OpenAI GPT-4.13.0644.8Misses a Standard requirement
Google Gemini 3.5 Flash3.5436.6Misses a Standard requirement
Google Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview4.7727Misses a Standard requirement
Anthropic Claude Sonnet 55.9255.7Misses a Standard requirement
Anthropic Claude Sonnet 4.66.9832.6Misses a Standard requirement
OpenAI GPT-5.6 Sol7.5319.4Meets every Standard requirement
Microsoft Translator1087.7Misses a Standard requirement
Anthropic Claude Opus 4.814.8533.9Misses a Standard requirement
Google Translation LLM20.0449.8Misses a Standard requirement
DeepL Next Gen27.549.8Misses a Standard requirement
Anthropic Claude Fable 529.6221.8Misses a Standard requirement

How we measure it: 11-01 · 10-10

English to Estonian translation requirements

Chart data
Errors per 1,000 words of the one-step solutions in Estonian, median, by requirement
RequirementMedian errors per 1,000 words
General translation quality40.7
Tag handling1
Tone of voice0.8
Terminology0.5
Gender neutrality0

The requirements with countable errors. Every solution with its result on each requirement: the explorer.

Bottleneck

General translation quality is the requirement most one-step solutions miss, and every three-step solution (translation + LQA + repair) meets it. On Google Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview, the weighted errors fall from 27.0 per 1,000 words in one step to 20.8 in the two-step solution (translation + post-edit) and to 12.5 in three steps. On Anthropic Claude Fable 5, they fall from 21.8 per 1,000 words in one step to 10.9 in three steps. The one-step LLM solutions that miss terminology have 94.4% to 98.7% of the glossary terms right.

How we measure it: 09-09 · 09-10 · 09-11 · 09-12 · 09-18

AI models and MT engines for English to Estonian translation

Chart data
Weighted errors per 1,000 words of the shortlisted one-step solutions in Estonian
ModelWeighted errors per 1,000 words of the shortlisted one-step solutions in EstonianClass
Microsoft Translator87.7MT engines
Anthropic Claude Sonnet 555.7LLMs
xAI Grok 4.20 (reasoning)50.8LLMs
DeepL Next Gen49.8LLM-based MT engines
Google Translation LLM49.8LLM-based MT engines
OpenAI GPT-4.144.8LLMs
Google Gemini 3.5 Flash36.6LLMs
Anthropic Claude Opus 4.833.9LLMs
Anthropic Claude Sonnet 4.632.6LLMs
Google Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview27LLMs
Anthropic Claude Fable 521.8LLMs
OpenAI GPT-5.6 Sol19.4LLMs

No translation into Estonian: Widn AI Tower Anthill (far too short, wrong language), Widn AI Tower Vesuvius (far too short, wrong language).

Model types

The one-step solutions on the nine LLMs have 19.4 to 55.7 weighted errors per 1,000 words, those on the two LLM-based MT engines, DeepL Next Gen and Google Translation LLM, 49.8 each, and the one on the MT engine Microsoft Translator 87.7. Only the translations from Google Translation LLM and Microsoft Translator have critical errors, 3 and 1. All nine shortlisted LLMs meet our language-support criteria in Estonian. The text we got back from Widn AI Tower Anthill and Widn AI Tower Vesuvius is far too short and in the wrong language.

How we measure it: 00-04 · 08-15 · 23-01

How we shortlisted English to Estonian translation solutions

Chart data
Ranks of the models on the two automatic metrics, Estonian
ModelCOMET-KiwiRank on COMET-KiwiMetricXRank on MetricXShortlistedShortlist place
z.ai GLM-50.86092.2712NoNot shortlisted
DeepSeek V3.20.857112.1610NoNot shortlisted
Tilde TildeOpen LLM engine0.849142.3818NoNot shortlisted
Translated Lara 20.848162.3417NoNot shortlisted
OpenAI GPT-5.50.847172.3316NoNot shortlisted
Mistral Large 30.844182.2914NoNot shortlisted
MoonshotAI Kimi K2.50.843192.6023NoNot shortlisted
SpeakLeash Bielik-11B-v3.0-Instruct0.843202.3919NoNot shortlisted
ModernMT Enterprise Edition0.842212.3115NoNot shortlisted
Pangeanic PangeaMT0.841222.6824NoNot shortlisted
OpenAI gpt-oss-120b0.833232.4320NoNot shortlisted
Mistral Medium 3.10.833242.4821NoNot shortlisted
MiniMax M2.50.830252.9327NoNot shortlisted
Google Gemma 40.827263.0429NoNot shortlisted
Anthropic Claude Haiku 4.50.821272.7625NoNot shortlisted
Google Cloud Advanced Translation API0.819283.1530NoNot shortlisted
Swiss AI Apertus-8B-25090.815293.0028NoNot shortlisted
Cohere Command A Translate0.809302.7726NoNot shortlisted
Alibaba Qwen3-235B-A22B0.806313.1831NoNot shortlisted
Yandex Cloud Translate v20.801323.6033NoNot shortlisted
SYSTRAN PNMT API0.798333.2632NoNot shortlisted
Amazon Translate0.791343.9835NoNot shortlisted
Cohere Tiny Aya0.774353.7934NoNot shortlisted
AI21 Jamba Large 1.70.758364.1236NoNot shortlisted
Alibaba Machine Translation API0.711375.7137NoNot shortlisted
TartuNLP0.552389.7938NoNot shortlisted
AppTek NMT0.2853917.3239NoNot shortlisted
Google Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview0.87011.862YesTop 8 by both metrics
OpenAI GPT-5.6 Sol0.86621.903YesTop 8 by both metrics
Anthropic Claude Opus 4.80.86532.2011YesTop 8 by COMET-Kiwi
DeepL Next Gen0.86441.781YesTop 8 by both metrics
xAI Grok 4.20 (reasoning)0.86252.108YesTop 8 by both metrics
Google Gemini 3.5 Flash0.86162.107YesTop 8 by both metrics
Anthropic Claude Sonnet 4.60.86172.129YesTop 8 by COMET-Kiwi
Anthropic Claude Sonnet 50.86182.085YesTop 8 by both metrics
OpenAI GPT-4.10.860101.994YesTop 8 by MetricX
Anthropic Claude Fable 50.857122.096YesTop 8 by MetricX
Google Translation LLM0.853132.2813YesReal-time place
Microsoft Translator0.848152.4922YesReal-time place
ModelSolution complexityCOMET-Kiwi rankCOMET-KiwiMetricX rankMetricXShortlist
Google Gemini 3.1 Pro PreviewAdjusted LLM10.87021.86Top 8 by both metrics
OpenAI GPT-5.6 SolAdjusted LLM20.86631.90Top 8 by both metrics
Anthropic Claude Opus 4.8Adjusted LLM30.865112.20Top 8 by COMET-Kiwi
DeepL Next GenAdjusted NMT40.86411.78Top 8 by both metrics
xAI Grok 4.20 (reasoning)Adjusted LLM50.86282.10Top 8 by both metrics
Google Gemini 3.5 FlashAdjusted LLM60.86172.10Top 8 by both metrics
Anthropic Claude Sonnet 4.6Adjusted LLM70.86192.12Top 8 by COMET-Kiwi
Anthropic Claude Sonnet 5Adjusted LLM80.86152.08Top 8 by both metrics
z.ai GLM-5Adjusted LLM90.860122.27Not shortlisted
OpenAI GPT-4.1Adjusted LLM100.86041.99Top 8 by MetricX
DeepSeek V3.2Adjusted LLM110.857102.16Not shortlisted
Anthropic Claude Fable 5Adjusted LLM120.85762.09Top 8 by MetricX
Google Translation LLMOff-the-shelf NMT130.853132.28Real-time place
Tilde TildeOpen LLM engineAdjusted NMT140.849182.38Not shortlisted
Microsoft TranslatorOff-the-shelf NMT150.848222.49Real-time place
Translated Lara 2Adjusted NMT160.848172.34Not shortlisted
OpenAI GPT-5.5Adjusted LLM170.847162.33Not shortlisted
Mistral Large 3Adjusted LLM180.844142.29Not shortlisted
MoonshotAI Kimi K2.5Adjusted LLM190.843232.60Not shortlisted
SpeakLeash Bielik-11B-v3.0-InstructAdjusted LLM200.843192.39Not shortlisted
ModernMT Enterprise EditionOff-the-shelf NMT210.842152.31Not shortlisted
Pangeanic PangeaMTOff-the-shelf NMT220.841242.68Not shortlisted
OpenAI gpt-oss-120bAdjusted LLM230.833202.43Not shortlisted
Mistral Medium 3.1Adjusted LLM240.833212.48Not shortlisted
MiniMax M2.5Off-the-shelf LLM250.830272.93Not shortlisted
Google Gemma 4Adjusted LLM260.827293.04Not shortlisted
Anthropic Claude Haiku 4.5Adjusted LLM270.821252.76Not shortlisted
Google Cloud Advanced Translation APIOff-the-shelf NMT280.819303.15Not shortlisted
Swiss AI Apertus-8B-2509Adjusted LLM290.815283.00Not shortlisted
Cohere Command A TranslateAdjusted LLM300.809262.77Not shortlisted
Alibaba Qwen3-235B-A22BAdjusted LLM310.806313.18Not shortlisted
Yandex Cloud Translate v2Off-the-shelf NMT320.801333.60Not shortlisted
SYSTRAN PNMT APIAdjusted NMT330.798323.26Not shortlisted
Amazon TranslateOff-the-shelf NMT340.791353.98Not shortlisted
Cohere Tiny AyaAdjusted LLM350.774343.79Not shortlisted
AI21 Jamba Large 1.7Adjusted LLM360.758364.12Not shortlisted
Alibaba Machine Translation APIOff-the-shelf NMT370.711375.71Not shortlisted
TartuNLPOff-the-shelf NMT380.552389.79Not shortlisted
AppTek NMTOff-the-shelf NMT390.2853917.32Not shortlisted
OpenAI GPT-5.6 LunaAdjusted LLM—0.857—2.04Same model family as OpenAI GPT-5.6 Sol
OpenAI GPT-5.6 TerraAdjusted LLM—0.866—2.06Same model family as OpenAI GPT-5.6 Sol
xAI Grok 4.20 (non-reasoning)Adjusted LLM—0.858—2.10Same model family as xAI Grok 4.20 (reasoning)

Every model we got a translation from, as the shortlist compared it: off the shelf, without context in the request, or adjusted, with it. A model that did not make the shortlist is shown adjusted, unless off the shelf it scores higher by 0.03 or more on COMET-Kiwi. Ranks among 39 models, with each model family counted once, and the top 8 of each metric in bold. Higher is better on COMET-Kiwi, lower on MetricX. The scores rank models within this language and are not a requirement result.

Metrics vs LQA

The metrics and Intento LQA order the shortlist differently. Translations from DeepL Next Gen, first on MetricX, have 49.8 weighted errors per 1,000 words by Intento LQA, and those from Google Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview, first on COMET-Kiwi, 27.0. Anthropic Claude Fable 5 made the shortlist through MetricX alone, 12th on COMET-Kiwi, and its one-step solution has 21.8 weighted errors per 1,000 words, second only to OpenAI GPT-5.6 Sol. The models nearest the cut are z.ai GLM-5, 9th on COMET-Kiwi, and DeepSeek V3.2, 10th on MetricX.

How we measure it: 00-08 · 00-09

English to Estonian translation cost

Quality levelCheapest solution that meets every requirement of the levelCost per million characters
BasicOpenAI GPT-5.6 Sol, one-step LLM adjusted for Standard requirements$7.53
StandardOpenAI GPT-5.6 Sol, one-step LLM adjusted for Standard requirements$7.53
AdvancedOpenAI GPT-5.6 Sol, one-step LLM adjusted for Standard requirements$7.53
Chart data
Cost of the shortlisted one-step solutions in Estonian
ModelUS dollars per million charactersClass
xAI Grok 4.20 (reasoning)$1.2LLMs
OpenAI GPT-4.1$3.06LLMs
Google Gemini 3.5 Flash$3.54LLMs
Google Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview$4.77LLMs
Anthropic Claude Sonnet 5$5.92LLMs
Anthropic Claude Sonnet 4.6$6.98LLMs
OpenAI GPT-5.6 Sol$7.53LLMs
Microsoft Translator$10MT engines
Anthropic Claude Opus 4.8$14.85LLMs
Google Translation LLM$20.04LLM-based MT engines
DeepL Next Gen$27.5LLM-based MT engines
Anthropic Claude Fable 5$29.62LLMs
Chart data
Tokens per character of the translation into Estonian, by model
ModelTokens per characterClass
Anthropic Claude Opus 4.80.504LLMs
Anthropic Claude Sonnet 50.502LLMs
Anthropic Claude Fable 50.501LLMs
Mistral Medium 3.10.431LLMs
Mistral Large 30.427LLMs
AI21 Jamba Large 1.70.409LLMs
Anthropic Claude Sonnet 4.60.398LLMs
Anthropic Claude Haiku 4.50.396LLMs
Alibaba Qwen3-235B-A22B0.381Open-weight LLMs
DeepSeek V3.20.378LLMs
Cohere Command A Translate0.375LLMs
z.ai GLM-50.371LLMs
MoonshotAI Kimi K2.50.364LLMs
Google Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview0.334LLMs
Google Gemini 3.5 Flash0.334LLMs
xAI Grok 4.20 (non-reasoning)0.334LLMs
xAI Grok 4.20 (reasoning)0.334LLMs
Google Gemma 40.329Open-weight LLMs
MiniMax M2.50.32LLMs
OpenAI GPT-5.6 Terra0.313LLMs
OpenAI GPT-4.10.312LLMs
OpenAI GPT-5.6 Luna0.312LLMs
OpenAI GPT-5.6 Sol0.312LLMs
OpenAI GPT-5.50.311LLMs
Cohere Tiny Aya0.295LLMs

How we measure it: 10-01 · 10-03 · 05-02

English to Estonian translation speed

Quality levelFastest solution that meets every requirement of the levelSeconds per 1,000 words
BasicOpenAI GPT-5.6 Sol, one-step LLM adjusted for Standard requirements79
StandardOpenAI GPT-5.6 Sol, one-step LLM adjusted for Standard requirements79
AdvancedOpenAI GPT-5.6 Sol, one-step LLM adjusted for Standard requirements79
Chart data
Time to translate 1,000 words into Estonian, by model
ModelSeconds per 1,000 wordsClass
Microsoft Translator0.2MT engines
Google Cloud Advanced Translation API0.2MT engines
Google Translation LLM0.5LLM-based MT engines
Pangeanic PangeaMT0.5MT engines
DeepL Next Gen0.6LLM-based MT engines
ModernMT Enterprise Edition0.9MT engines
Amazon Translate1.1MT engines
SYSTRAN PNMT API1.2MT engines
Translated Lara 21.5LLM-based MT engines
Yandex Cloud Translate v22.8MT engines
OpenAI gpt-oss-120b3.7Open-weight LLMs
TartuNLP5.4MT engines
Tilde TildeOpen LLM engine7LLM-based MT engines
OpenAI GPT-5.6 Luna15LLMs
Google Gemini 3.5 Flash17LLMs
Cohere Tiny Aya17LLMs
OpenAI GPT-4.118LLMs
Alibaba Machine Translation API25MT engines
OpenAI GPT-5.6 Terra31LLMs
DeepSeek V3.232LLMs
xAI Grok 4.20 (non-reasoning)34LLMs
Mistral Medium 3.143LLMs
Anthropic Claude Haiku 4.543LLMs
Swiss AI Apertus-8B-250951Open-weight LLMs
AI21 Jamba Large 1.751LLMs
MiniMax M2.555LLMs
Cohere Command A Translate58LLMs
OpenAI GPT-5.563LLMs
SpeakLeash Bielik-11B-v3.0-Instruct63Open-weight LLMs
Mistral Large 367LLMs
Anthropic Claude Sonnet 569LLMs
AppTek NMT75MT engines
OpenAI GPT-5.6 Sol79LLMs
Anthropic Claude Fable 579LLMs
Anthropic Claude Sonnet 4.682LLMs
Anthropic Claude Opus 4.895LLMs
xAI Grok 4.20 (reasoning)96LLMs
Google Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview112LLMs
Alibaba Qwen3-235B-A22B138Open-weight LLMs
Google Gemma 4195Open-weight LLMs
z.ai GLM-5263LLMs
MoonshotAI Kimi K2.5274LLMs

Real-time models are those the shortlist counts as real-time, under 2 seconds per text across the languages we timed. The chart shows the time of each model into Estonian.

Trade-off

The fastest one-step LLM solutions on the shortlist, on Google Gemini 3.5 Flash and OpenAI GPT-4.1, take 17 and 18 seconds per 1,000 words, against 79 for the one on OpenAI GPT-5.6 Sol. Both miss general translation quality, with 36.6 and 44.8 weighted errors per 1,000 words against 19.4.

How we measure it: 12-01 · 12-02 · 12-09

Tone of voice and gender-neutral English to Estonian translation

Tone of voice
Formal register, with teie (teie-vorm)
Gender-neutrality strategy
No grammatical gender for persons — neutral by default; only avoid gendered terms
Default gender
None where the source leaves the gender open
The two best solutionsSolutionSentences about people that are gender-neutralMeets every Advanced requirementCost per million charactersSeconds per 1,000 words
OpenAI GPT-5.6 Solone-step100%✓$7.5379
Anthropic Claude Fable 5three-step100%✓$641238
Analysis

For tone of voice we check the formal register, with teie. Translations from all nine shortlisted LLMs have 100% of the sentences in the formal register, against 93.6% for DeepL Next Gen, 87.2% for Google Translation LLM and 59.6% for Microsoft Translator. Estonian has no grammatical gender for persons, so for gender neutrality we check that a translation avoids gendered terms and does not add a gender the source leaves open.

How we measure it: 02-05 · 02-06 · 08-11 · 09-18

How confident are we in measuring English to Estonian translation quality?

Confidence

Neither pair of automatic metrics is borderline in Estonian: each pair agrees above its threshold even at the low end of its range. The three LQA judges agree on a median of 95.5% of the sentences across the 12 shortlisted solutions. So neither the agreement of the metrics nor that of the LQA judges limits the results on this page.

How we measure it: 00-07 · 07-05 · 09-02

Automate translation to meet your requirements

See Intento Language Hub in action.

Book a demo
Leave feedback