Ventrilo and Skype: Peer-to-Peer versus Client-Server in VOIP

Ventrilo and Skype are both widely used PC-based VOIP applications. While both are excellent and ultimately similar utilities, they are almost the complete opposite when it comes to their underlying network architectures. Ventrilo uses the Client-Server architecture whereas Skype uses Peer-to-Peer (often abbreviated as p2p). Because of this distinction, there are several situations in which choosing one over the other may be of greater benefit. In this article we will be discussing the use of both programs in the context of business conferences, social groups and gaming clans or guilds.

Skype

Peer-to-Peer

Peer-to-Peer Diagram

In Peer-to-Peer, each node makes its resources available to other nodes in its group. As such, Peer-to-Peer services will be less dependent on central hubs to coordinate or relay network traffic. Skype uses their own implementation of the Peer-to-Peer architecture. The diagram to the left will generally not provide an exact visual representation for Skype’s own p2p implementation as it has proprietary peer hierarchies and authentication services. But for our purposes this representation is sufficient in that it demonstrates the general layout, advantages and flaws that it shares with the general definition of a Peer-to-Peer network.

Advantages

The biggest advantage of Skype is that it should not incur any additional charges on the end-user. In reality, there are additional costs but these are generally invisible to the user as the ISP is responsible for regular maintenance and upgrades to the network. Nor is there the necessity for the user to keep up a server for dedicated use — this is all handled by Skype’s services. Another advantage of Skype is that it is relatively easy to use and is akin to most IM programs. This makes Skype perfect for online social meetings such as family conferences and online study groups, where not all of the users may be technically inclined.

• Free or Cheap
• No servers
• Easy to use

Disadvantages

Most of Skype’s flaws become evident in situations where technical efficiency or more moderation tools are necessary. Because Skype is p2p-based, each node requires multiple inbound and outbound connects. This generally results in greater overhead costs including bandwidth. Skype is also known to increase its own process priority. This means Skype will have more priority to access systems than other applications on the computer, this behavior may not be ideal for gaming or in other situations where other applications demand more system resources. Because Skype was designed to be easy to use, it is also less expressive in its ability to define user and moderation roles. For social voice chats this may not be a problem, but gaming and business users will often require this ability to provide a parallel to roles within their organization.

• Less efficient than Ventrilo and other Client-Server applications
• Greater overhead and bandwidth usage
• Little to no management and moderation tools

Ventrilo

Client-Server Diagram

In contrast to Skype’s Peer-to-Peer system, Ventrilo uses the Client-Server model. In the client-server model, nodes do not make any direct connections to other nodes. Instead, all nodes connect to the server which acts as a hub — it receives and relays only the necessary audio streams and data to individual nodes. The client-server model generally uses much less bandwidth and creates less overhead than the p2p system. The server’s role as a central hub also allows for more detailed roles and management tools available to the server administrators and users.

Advantages

Ventrilo will require less resource usage, both system and network related, than Skype. This is an especially useful trait in gaming where most users demand minimal application usage to ensure better in-game frame rates. The server can also act as a filter and management system, enabling more expressive user and moderator roles. Servers have the ability to create “Channels,” which act as partitions or virtual chatrooms within the server, allowing users to have conversions with certain subsets of the server population without having to go into a completely different conference room as you would with Skype. Rules can also be defined within the context of a specific channel.

• Less resource usage
• More moderation and management tools
• Greater organizational capabilities

Disadvantages

Ventrilo has its share of disadvantages. One being that it may require an additional cost to keep large servers running. Luckily, this cost is not great but it does exist and is evident to some frugal users. Another disadvantage is that it is not as easy to use as Skype — this is a drawback due to its ability to be customized to a group’s liking. Therefore Ventrilo may not be optimal in situations where a group wants to get up and running as quickly as possible.

• Requires server
• May require additional costs
• Not as easy to use as Skype

Conclusion

Skype and Ventrilo are both excellent tools. However, Skype may be more suitable for social groups (family chats, etc.) as it is easy to setup, use and costs nothing. Whereas Ventrilo may be more ideal for gaming and business users who require greater technical efficiency and more management tools at the cost of money and a greater learning curve.

2 Responses to “Ventrilo and Skype: Peer-to-Peer versus Client-Server in VOIP”

1. Nakesha Bretos says:

   March 17, 2010 at 11:22 am

   Your website is one of my favorite. I m gonna bookmark, thank you.

   Log in to Reply
2. Magic jack says:

   May 27, 2010 at 6:55 pm

   VIOP is definitely the way of the future. It’s exciting to see the new technologies being developed. I am an electrical engineering and programmer, and although I don’t work in the VOIP field, I am great interested by it.

   Log in to Reply

Why Choose My Ventrilo Server?

• Instant Server Activation
• 24/7 Technical Support Available
• High Quality Ventrilo Codecs
• Low Latency, Premium Routing
• Worldwide Server Locations

Pricing Specials

Customer Testimonial