This article explains the differences between two AI meeting-recording tools—from live transcription and translation to AI summaries—covering pros and cons end to end.

Meeting Ink vs Notta (2025) full comparison: If you're looking to improve your online meetings and make note taking easier, this guide will help you choose the option that works best for you.

Feature Comparison | How to Choose an AI Meeting Assistant

Meeting Ink works seamlessly for both online and in-person meetings and can even process audio or video directly from links. It offers multi-speaker recognition, AI meeting summaries, translation in 20+ languages, and live transcription. With a full set of features for any meeting scenario, including Zoom, Google Meet, Teams, or in-person meetings, Meeting Ink provides a complete and flexible AI meeting notetaker. [See features]

Notta also offers meeting transcription, translation, and summarization, quickly turning meetings or recordings into audio-to-text and summaries. It provides a smooth experience, especially for individual users looking for an easy AI transcription software.

Feature Comparison

Performance Test: How Fast Do These Tools Generate Transcriptions and Summaries?

We tested both tools using the same standard MP3 audio file in English, 26 minutes long. The file is a real-world podcast with multiple speakers, closely reflecting typical meeting scenarios.

Test setup:

Results:

• Meeting Ink processes audio files much faster than Notta.
• Although Notta uploads audio slightly quicker, Meeting Ink completes both voice recording transcription and AI summary tasks in far less time, making it more efficient overall.

User Takeaways | Which One Fits You?

In speed tests, Meeting Ink completed a 26-minute audio file into full transcription and a summary two times faster than Notta. This can save you time and make meetings more efficient. Both tools offer similar core features, including live transcription, audio uploads, translation, and AI-generated summaries.

Looking at the free plans, Notta gives 2 hours per month with a short limit of about 3 minutes per recording. Meeting Ink’s free plan is more practical for everyday use, offering 3 hours per month and up to 30 minutes per recording. For paid plans, Meeting Ink is more budget-friendly at US$9.99 per month for 20 hours of meetings, compared with Notta at US$13.49 per month. 

Click to view plans

Product Takeaways & Recommendations

Both Meeting Ink and Notta are popular AI notetaker tools. Meeting Ink stands out for its faster transcription and summary generation, practical free and paid plans, and reliable performance, making it ideal for users who want a smooth and efficient workflow. Notta offers similar core features and also includes a mind-map feature, which can be useful for users who prefer a more visual way to organize ideas.

If you want an all-around AI meeting assistant that saves time, delivers the same key features, and provides better value, Meeting Ink is the more practical choice.