Zoron :
It really doesn't matter. You're not going to notice the difference in voice quality (CPU usage will be determined by your sound subsystem, not the program itself) and with a broadband connection, you're not going to notice any difference in bandwidth either.
- This isn't correct. The codec in any of these solutions is not processed by the sound card. It is all done in the CPU. Teamspeak and Ventrilo are less efficient in their methods than Mumble or Skype.
Zoron :
What it will come down to is the server. The person with the fastest computer and highest speed internet connection should be the server. Your clients will only perform as well as the server serving them.
- This is true on a peer-to-server-to-peer design like Teamspeak and Ventrilo. But in a true peer-to-peer architecture like Mumble and Skype it is a bit more like everyone is a client and a server. In Skype's specific case, one instance acts as the host. But unlike TS/Vent, if the host isn't running on a speedy connection or fast server, the call members will typically not suffer any degradation or higher latency. This Skype host acts more like a call coordinator than the network route that all traffic passes thru.
berler :
You completely miss the point. Most people that want a good voice server will use a dedicated server and not host on their gaming rig. I'm talking about running a teamspeak DEDICATED server, and timing latencies, and comparing that to ventrilo running on the SAME dedicated server.
- This is really completely variable on the user's PC resources - or, really - their spare resources when their game is running. Your post was written in mid 2006 when dual core wasn't the standard, and now many higher end gamers are running Quad-cores. The game I play is 4 years old now and I'm running it on a 3.6ghz i7. I actually run our 10+ S4PG.Server conference rooms (each a Skype instance) on a VMware Virtual machine running on top of my Win7 OS. No slow downs, no call latency, no problems.
ottocruyt :
I' have allways chosen to use Skype, I know it's very Bandwith and CPU demanding, but we are a rather small clan, with no more than wars with 3-5 persons. The Quality is absolutely the best! But the main reason why I had chosen to use skype, was because it had no DELAY.
Can anyone tell me if there is a difference in delay. Also, I allways used public TS and Vent servers, and someone has said me the delay on payed, dedicated server is far less, and even unnoticable. Is this true?
- Yes, its quality is by far the best. Especially since Skype 4.1 and the
SILK codec.. Skype's bandwidth usage is not as bad as you think. SILK has the best compression by far and will always automatically try to find the perfect balance between audio quality and network usage. For a medium quality call you can expect between 1.5KB/sec to 2KB/sec. For a high-def (what Skype deems Super-Wideband audio) I've seen it reach 4KB/sec to 4.8KB/sec. It will use more the more call members are talking at once but its not a completely linear gain.
bjason82 :
It is true, when comparing vent to skype, there are some quality differences, but at what expense? Skype could be run smoothly by some, in addition to running whichever game you play, but one cannot forget about the multitude of others who need all the juice they can get out of their gaming rig and cannot spare that extra ram and resources required by skype. Ventrilo truly is a low-resource requirement program, relatively speaking.
- There are "major" quality differences. Not just audio quality, but latency. The "expense" is that Skype will use about 5 times the memory as TS/Vent. 11MB vs 55MB means nothing to me, because I have plenty to spare - but that doesn't make your point invalid, if the person has an older rig, that 40MB could be very important to them.
bjason82 :
Plus, ventrilo has been around for a long time and more than likely has greater acceptance within the gaming community. And if the fact is true that TS is no longer being supported and updated, then I would 100% go with ventrilo.
- Ventrilo does have very heavy acceptance. It's easily in the #1 spot as the solution people use when a game developer doesn't include their own VoIP solution (which is very rare these days). However Ventrilo can be relatively expensive for a moderate gaming group, and it will never be upgraded to a peer-to-peer model. IMO, Vent will be in use forever - its more that gamers with the desire for quality and avoidance of what to me is utterly unbearable lag, will migrate to solutions like Mumble and Skype.
CyberspyTBC :
If you want a real quick over-view as too which one to use, well here you go.
Ventrilo:
Pro's: Great sound quality | Easy to create channels & setup users | Integrated chat room, users can post comments / urls with easy access | Admin side is realy simple to work with | Users can post global & private messages
- I disagree, the best dedicated Vent servers and highest codec settings I've used, the audio quality would only be counted as "moderate". Skype also has chat rooms (Public Chats) that are universal. Users can do global and private messages (because its a very mature IM client).
CyberspyTBC :
Cons: $$$$$$
If you want to run your own "Private" Ventrilo server, it has a max. cap of only 8 connections. (Only 8 people can be connected at a time), If you want more, you have to "rent" a server from a hosting company, OR work for a large company that is willing to buy a min. of 1000 slots. (According to Vents web site, you have have to submit proof that your company exists).
Here is an
example fee: $0.49 per user. Mumble is free, and while not finalized - we expect the licensing on our S4PG.Server product to run about $3/mo for at least 2 or 3 instances (appox 48-72 simultaneous callers). We can do that because we aren't hosting the instances, and because it is a peer-to-peer model a much higher percentage of our customers will easily be able to host it themselves.
CyberspyTBC :
Alright, im tired of typing, hope this info was useful to someone out there.
-heh.. Your post was the most useful. and I didn't plan to type for 45 minutes either....
moober :
My warcraft guild has tried Skype, TeamSpeak, and Ventrilo. Here's our story:
1. We started with skype because most people had it. The sound quality of Skype especially shines when people talk "over" each other -- you can hear multiple people talking at the same time.
Cons: conference calls are limited to 10 people (so no guild meeting or larger groups). The person hosting a 10 person conference call would often experience degraded game play, probably due to local network bottlenecks. Finally, Skype requires that there be a conference call "host" -- someone has to dial folks in to the conversation. Inconvenient as folks come and go from the group, and inconvenient when the host has to leave.
2. We tried ventrilo. Probably based on our skype experience, most folks wanted voice activation, rather than push to talk, but several of us were simply not able to figure out voice activation. Vent is not quite as clear as skype when folks talk over each other, but it's not bad. Nobody has to host the call, network requirements for any single user are pretty low. We tried a hosted service, so there is a little money involved in this solution.
1. Yes that is one things our Ventrilo to Skype converts notice right away. Multiple people talking at once can actually be understood. and since there is no really noticeable lag, people can easily stop talking if they accidentally start speaking when someone else has. With Vent (again, IMO) this was so unbearable.
Con: 10 caller limit. I'm not sure where you got that info, but the limit is actually 24 callers per instance.
Con: Skype requires that there be a conference call "host" - yup. No autoconference management. But that's why we are developing S4PG.Server.
Con: No PTT in Skype or Voice activation: S4PG.Client will provide PTT and MTK. And according to Skype's upcoming version 4.2, there is a new feature for auto-mute when not speaking. I've not tested this yet tho.
Wow, I can't believe how much I just typed.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram