Tesseract vs dots.ocr
Tesseract is cheaper per page; Tesseract is faster; only dots.ocr supports tables, math, bounding boxes.
Tesseracttesseract/tesseract | dots.ocrrednote/dots-ocr | |
|---|---|---|
| Type | Open source | Open source |
| Price | Free | 2 credits / page |
| Per 1,000 pages | $0.00 | $2.00 |
| Typical speed | 0.6 s / page | 1.5 s / page |
| Best for | Clean printed text, free | Multilingual document parsing |
| Inputs | PDF, images | PDF, images |
| Languages | 100+ languages | 100+ languages |
| Max pages per request | 500 | 500 |
| Tables | No | ✓ Yes |
| Handwriting | No | No |
| Math | No | ✓ Yes |
| Bounding boxes | No | ✓ Yes |
| Confidence | No | No |
| Forms | No | No |
| Multilingual | ✓ Yes | ✓ Yes |
| On OCRRouter | Available | Coming soon |
Prices are what you pay on OCRRouter. Speed is the provider's typical figure, not a benchmark we ran.
What each one is
dots.ocr
Single vision model from rednote that does layout detection and content recognition together.
dots.ocr detailsUse one, fall back to the other
Request body
{
"model": "tesseract/tesseract",
"fallbacks": ["rednote/dots-ocr"],
"file_url": "https://example.com/document.pdf"
}