MeetNotes
vs Microsoft Teams
Scored blind by ChatGPT: Microsoft Teams ~6.8, MeetNotes ~8.8. The same recording through both, with every product name removed before scoring. The full scorecard, and where Microsoft Teams won, are below.
How the test works MeetNotes vs Microsoft Teams, feature by feature
MeetNotes vs Microsoft Teams
Winner: MeetNotes — except on raw completeness, which Teams won
A 38-minute English-language call between two sides, with commercial and technical vocabulary throughout. Published anonymously — no participant, company or meeting content is identified beyond the individual misheard terms below, and none was needed to score it.
Judged by: ChatGPT (OpenAI) — Microsoft Teams ~6.8, MeetNotes ~8.8
Run blind — the product names were stripped from both outputs before scoring, so neither could be traced to a brand.
Rubric: Transcript against transcript. The supplied Teams export contained the transcript only, with no summary or action-item section in the file, so there was nothing on that side to score our minutes against — that is what was in the export we were given, not a statement about what Teams can produce. The nine criteria scored are listed as scored; like the run below, they are not the seven published above.
| Criterion | Microsoft Teams | MeetNotes |
|---|---|---|
| Overall, transcript against transcript | ~6.8 | ~8.8 |
| Transcript completeness | 8.5 | 8.2 |
| Readability | 6.5 | 9.0 |
| Speaker separation | 7.5 | 8.5 |
| Names and product terminology | 5.0 | 9.0 |
| Numbers and commercial detail | 8.0 | 8.8 |
| Context understood | 6.0 | 9.2 |
| Factual caution | 6.5 | 8.8 |
| Concision | 5.0 | 9.2 |
| Business usefulness | 5.8 | 9.0 |
- Transcript completeness, 8.5 to 8.2. Teams caught more of the words, including small talk and short interjections that our transcript dropped.
Teams won completeness: it caught more of the words, including small talk we dropped. Then it spent that advantage on the proper nouns the meeting was actually about.
“Zero”
The word wasXero
“my orb / my op / my ops”
The word wasMYOB
“Israel”
The word wasNew Zealand
“Datablix · Jenny · Vortex AI”
The word wasDatabricks · Genie · Cortex AI
One further error is not shown, because printing it would identify the company whose meeting this was: the name of the product the entire call was about, rendered throughout as an unrelated personal name.
This result on its own page The full write-up of this result
One meeting is one meeting. A result here shows what happened to this recording, on this day, with these judges — not a general ranking, not an average, and not a claim about how either tool performs on your audio. That is the entire reason the protocol is published: the only comparison that decides anything for you is the one you run yourself.
Disclosure: MeetNotes itself uses AI models from more than one large AI company, including at least one whose assistant is on this panel.
Your meeting,
your judge.
Record one real meeting, run it through MeetNotes and any tool you already pay for, strip both product names off, and let an AI assistant score them blind. The protocol and the judge prompt are published in full, and we publish the rounds we lose. Send us the result — win or lose — and we credit 200 free minutes.
Test it on your own meeting
100 minutes included, no card. The only comparison that decides anything is the one you run.
