Run the same scan through Foxit LLM OCR (next-gen, GPU-accelerated), Foxit C++ Classic (line-level confidence), and open-source Tesseract 5.4 — simultaneously. Two commercial Foxit engines against the open-source baseline (plus Tesseract compiled to WASM, running right in your browser), with timing, confidence, and full-text output side-by-side.
Drop a PDF or image to compare all OCR engines
Runs Foxit C++, Foxit LLM, Tesseract Server, and Tesseract WASM simultaneouslyThe contenders. Foxit LLM OCR is Foxit’s unreleased next-generation engine, running GPU-accelerated (ONNX + CUDA on an RTX 3080 Ti) — try it solo at /FoxitOCR/. Foxit C++ Classic is the production OCR add-on (foxit::addon::ocr) with line-level confidence — solo demo at /FoxitOCR2/. Tesseract 5.4 is the open-source LSTM engine with per-word confidence — solo demo at /TesseractOCR/.
The race. Your document is uploaded once per server engine (each goes through its own PHP proxy to the same Windows workstation, so the hardware is identical) while a fourth run — Tesseract compiled to WebAssembly — executes entirely in your browser tab. All four run concurrently; the cards fill in as each engine finishes.
The scoreboard. Timing bars show wall-clock speed. The accuracy table compares each engine’s self-reported confidence plus word/line/character counts, and the text tabs hold the full output of every engine so you can diff the actual results — the numbers only tell half the story.