Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Closed

Teamspeak vs Ventrilo, REAL statistics, not opinions

Last response: in Windows XP
Share
May 20, 2006 6:57:40 PM

I have searched the internet everywhere and could not find any place that had a real comparison of Teamspeak and Ventrilo. I'm not talking about people just saying "oh I like x better". You can find millions of that online. What I'm talking about is someone doing real tests of cpu usage, bandwidth, latency, and overall quality of the sound. I do not have the tools to do such a test, but I bet the guys at TG do. What would be MOST useful are having various catagories. These catagories will be sorted by cpu usage, and bandwidth. For example:

Compare the sound quality between TS and Vent when the cpu usage is exactly (or as close to) 1%, 3%, 5%. (this would be achieved by changing the sound quality until the cpu usage is these %). And then you could use sound capture for both to compare the quality.
A similar test will be used to compare bandwidth vs quality. For example: set TS and Vent to use 1kb/s, 5kb/s, 10 kb/s, etc. and compare quality (with the bandwidth as close to each other as possible).

With both of these tests, the latency will also be recorded for comparison.

Other tests could also compare server cpu usage (and test the ability of the server to handle multiple channels of various sizes).

IMHO these statistics will be very helpful in the gaming community as it will help people decide which voice chat program they will use (whether they want to get the lowest latency, highest sound quality, or lowest cpu usage).
May 21, 2006 2:45:43 PM

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.

Use whatever program you prefer to use. I've used both and haven't noticed a lick of difference between the two. It's only a matter of personal preference.
May 21, 2006 5:04:16 PM

its really not so much that it matters, I mostly think it would be cool to know which one performs better. I also would like having some facts about the performance of both that I could use to convince my friends to use one over the other.
Related resources
Can't find your answer ? Ask !
May 21, 2006 10:28:35 PM

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.
May 22, 2006 2:10:04 AM

Quote:
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.


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. I'm not a noob. I know that it's pointless to run a server when you dont have enough cpu power or bandwidth. That's why I'm talking about the client software here. My only interest in the server cpu/bandwidth usage is for people who want to use their server box to host other services.
May 23, 2006 6:52:09 PM

Well then, again, my original point stands. I don't believe there's going to be any appreciable difference between the two; it will boil down to personal preference. In today's world of 2+ GHz computers and 1Mbps + broadband connections... you probably aren't going to notice a performance difference between the two.
May 24, 2006 12:54:32 PM

They are both rather small programs that aren't resource hogs... how will this help the gaming community?

The only thing gamers need to know about them is what their clan runs on.
July 26, 2006 10:34:20 PM

from using both for a while now and with multiple clans i have found a few facts

~voice quality is better with vent
~vent allows you to turn up the incoming speech louder than teamspeak so you can hear your teammates over the game noise
~teamspeak is more user friendly
~teamspeak has not been updated in a while
January 7, 2007 7:45:57 AM

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?

Thanks,

the CiA-clan (www.cia-clan.be)
August 20, 2007 5:52:20 PM

Wow, and it only took until the last two posters to put up some useful information. I don't see why you all felt compelled to put in your two cents if you had absolutely nothing constructive to contribute to the topic? The man asked for a comparative analysis and you all gave him flack for it; and on top of that, I honestly don't see it as that outrageous of a question.

....BACK TO TOPIC....
I have used vent for quite a while now, never Teamspeak. I find ventrilo to be a well designed software with lots of flexibility and options. That's not to say I don't have my wish list of changes to the program, but all-in-all i am happy with its performance.

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.

Like I said before, I cannot offer a heads-up comparison of vent to ts, but from what I have gathered from McGreek's post, ventrilo is the way to go; and my experience supports that.

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.
August 21, 2007 6:16:20 AM

Your information wasn't all that useful when applied to the original question. You basically restated excatly what I did... no appreciable difference between TS and Vent... just a matter of personal preference. (When talking about performance impact at least). Personally, I have both (and Skype) loaded on my computer because different people have different preferences.

Besides, if you cared to actually look at the date of the original post... TS was still a viable alternative back then. But thank you for bumping an old post and making all sort of assumptions that don't necessarily apply anymore.
July 7, 2008 9:36:18 AM

Dead post probably but...

I used TS2 for the last few years and found that it worked pretty well. I knew a lot of WoW players that use Ventrilo so I tried it out the other day and to me, Ventrilo is sounding better. This may be from the setup that Ventrilo allows, i.e., incoming/outgoing sound controls and/or 44KHz sampling compared to the 32KHz that the TS speex codec used. I'm not exactly sure, but it does seem to sound better.

~S
July 7, 2008 7:45:42 PM

Dead post.. but relevant still.

They both use the same technology. Its a matter of looking at the specs of each.

If Ventrillo uses 44KHz and TeamSpeak uses 32KHz, that's the difference.

Overall, the technology is the same and the only variable is the options the client allows you to have. No one can say one is better than the other technically.. its a matter of what options you need.

Overall, system usage is the same for both.
October 12, 2008 10:22:46 AM

I run TeamSpeak & Ventrilo both. Our clan uses Ventrilo for Primary voice communications, and TeamSpeak as seconday/back-up comms.

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

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).

TeamsSpeak 2:
Pros:
Very little bandwidth / memory / processor usage
Web Based Server Admin config tool
Very easy to add new members and assign admin rights
Simple to create channels and sub-channels
Users can post global & private messages

Cons:
Voice quality is a LITTLE less than Ventrilo.
Doesn't have Channel / User Phonetic's --
--(doesn't say the users name when they login unlike Ventrilo)
Doesn't have the integrated chat room like Ventrio
Doesn't have cross channel transmitting

Server Side Pro's / Cons:
Ventrilo pros:
Easy to install
Easy to configure
Able to be added as a Service

Cons:
Capped out at 8 connections max.

TeamsSpeak:
Pros:
Has a very useful Admin Web interface (in-case your server gets hacked)
Very little system usage

Cons:
Does not come with a "Service" installer. You have to manually run the server program each time. *Or, you can do what I did, and do a google search on how to "Create a service in windows", in which case, it takes about 3 minutes to setup TeamSpeak to work as a service. Not really sure why they didnt include a service installer...but whatever.

Processor / Memory / Bandwidth Usage:
I just want to put this out there, I don't care what you read or where you read it at. The programs themselves use very little system processing power. It depends on what settings you have the programs set at, the computer your running them on, and the internet thats available. The higher the voice quality, the more power its going to take for the computer to process everyone talking.

If you are wanting to run a server from your house using a cable modem or dsl connection, your going to run in to lag *sounds choppy when people talk*. The more people you have connected to your server, the more internet bandwidth your going to use. If its just you and a friend talking it wont be so bad, if its you and a friend talking well your playing an on-line game, you may start to hear your friend breaking up a little bit. The more people in your server, and the more stuff your internet is doing, the more choppy its going to get. Doesn't matter which program you use, there both going to do the same thing.

If you want to try and run a server, heres a word of advice.
1) Get a dedicated computer with nothing installed on it but either TeamSpeak or Ventrilo.

2) Make sure the computer meets the min. requirments to run that program.
(If thers going to be lots of people, don't use the min. requirements, up it to the recemendend at least)

3). MAKE SURE YOUR INTERNET CONNECTION HAS A HIGH UPLOAD SPEED (NOT DOWNLOAD.) 1.5mb through a cable modem means roughly 400kbs in real life. This is NOT going to work with when you get over 3 people connected and you start playing games online....

Alright, im tired of typing, hope this info was useful to someone out there.

Peace.
November 25, 2008 2:24:57 PM

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.

3. We're now using Teamspeak. Setup is easy, and most of our folks were able to figure out voice activation fairly quickly. Audio quality is good, but not quite as good as vent when people talk over each other. Like vent, nobody has to host the call, low network requirements.

In our view, if TS could do better when multiple people talk, it would be just right for us.
April 16, 2009 11:33:13 AM

this is my two cents with experiance with both as servers (linux) and clients also did use skype abit.

ventrilo
pro:
easy to install (client and server)
great sound quality.
medium cpu load server
low bandwith use.
easy to admin.
private chat (when renting server with function active.)

cons
only 8 people at a time on private hosted server.
big bill on rented server.
you have to manualy make a start up in linux.

teamspeak
pro:
easy to install.
good sound quality
low cpu load
verry low bandwith use.
moderate to admin.
private chat text (is posible on all servers ts2)

cons:
a little less sound quality and you again have to make a startup script for the linux server to start.
no phonetic names.
no comments.

Anonymous
a b à CPUs
December 24, 2009 1:47:22 AM

Ventrilo usage : 10,524K of mem usage
Teamspeak usage : 12188K of mem usage
January 6, 2010 11:00:15 AM

Hi guys, I realize this is a pretty old thread but I wanted to add some information to it after finding it in a Google search. I've been posting some follow ups to threads where people are discussing VoIP solutions for PC Online Gaming.

I saw a couple people discussing Ventrilo vs Teamspeak and a mention of Skype.. So here is some input;

First of all, since I'm writing this reply to plug my company's upcoming product - I'll attempt to be fair. There is another (somewhat new) solution that is open source (thus free) that seems to have a loyal following. It has its pro's and con's, but even with all its con's it pretty easily beats Teamspeak and Ventrilo. You can read about it here

... but now on to my plug :sol: 
I'm the product development manager for Skype for Power Gamers ( http://s4pg.us ) - We are developing a Skype add-on product suite that will enable Skype to act like a Ventrilo server.

Our two core products are S4PG.Server and S4PG.Client. A quick summary:
- S4PG.Server: Conference Call / Group IM - auto conference system.
- S4PG.Client : Provides Push-to-Talk / Mute-Toggle-Key functions for Skype. Provides in game overlay interface for controlling Skype (calls, chats, etc) inside your game (No more Alt-Tab to desktop)

Our team has been running internal alpha test Skype servers for about 2 years now with about 100 members for a Lord of The Rings based RTS game.

We spent the first year treating it as a proof-of-concept feasibility study and started commercial development of it in Q3 2009. It's coming along for a late Q1 or early Q2 early public beta release.

My real purpose for writing this post is to spread the word so we can grow our beta tester user base and get feedback as we prepare for an official beta release. So if this fits you, please head over to our site and try our client, or if you have a nice sized gaming group (clan/guild/etc) you can fill out an application to become a beta tester for S4PG.Server when it is ready.

Reading over everyone's debate in this thread there are a several things I can elaborate on. I'll do that in the next post so this one doesn't get so long. But here is a quick summary of how I would rate the various products on a 1-10 scale:

Teamspeak: 3.5
Ventrilo: 4.3
Mumble: 6.8
Skype: 8.9
January 6, 2010 11:03:12 AM

Zoron said:
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 said:
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 said:
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 said:
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 said:
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 said:
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 said:
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 said:
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 said:
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 said:
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. :hello: 
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.

Anonymous
a b à CPUs
January 27, 2010 11:50:01 PM

I have a vent if anyone would like to use it ...
hostname---Chi3.ugt-servers.com
port----29095

come on and join the fun can set you up with your own room
February 2, 2010 4:59:17 PM

Teamspeak 3 is out now. The quality of voice can now be changed within the server to well over 48khz, that is double Skype's quality, and quadruple Ventrilo's quality. The interface is also very clean cut and extremely intuitive.

I was hosting 3 Ventrilo servers through a company because I had 2 guilds and a CSS Pro Gaming server. The accounts on all three have been terminated in light of the new TS3 server and client and capabilities list.

TS3 SERVER now features the following:
22khz-48khz With superb voice quality.
512 slots on the FREE SERVER!
Great uptime and low CPU usage.

TS3 Client has too many new features to list. Go check it out if you must know what I am talking about.

peace
August 6, 2011 7:45:56 AM

xanzion said:
Teamspeak 3 is out now. The quality of voice can now be changed within the server to well over 48khz, that is double Skype's quality, and quadruple Ventrilo's quality. The interface is also very clean cut and extremely intuitive.
...

Old thread, but... :kaola: 

The plus-side of TeamSpeak 3 and Skype is that also Linux-users can run them natively :D 
So I would recommend TeamSpeak if you have a dedicated server and Skype otherwise.

Mikko
a b à CPUs
August 6, 2011 12:08:44 PM

This topic has been closed by Mousemonkey
!