2021•IJCCS (Indonesian Journal of Computing and Cybernetics Systems)Open access

Analysis of Video CODEC Performance Using Different Softphone Applications

Dandun Kusuma Yudha, Ahmad Ashari

Open full text 1 citations

Abstract

In a video call there are several components, such as IP phone or softphone, CODEC, and server. Selection of softphone and CODEC is a consideration in building a video communication network because it will affect the quality of video call. This research compare the quality of video calls based on softphone application and CODEC combination. The quality measured by QoS, PSNR, and MOS parameters.Softphone applications examined in this research are Blink, Zoiper, MicroSIP, PortGo, Linphone, and X-Lite. CODEC examined in this research are H.264, VP8, H.263+, and H.263. Each softphone application will be combined with a CODEC that is native to the softphone. There are nine combinations of softphone application and CODEC.Based on the research results, CODEC H.264 has the best performance when paired with the Blink softphone application. CODEC VP8 has the best performance when paired with the Zoiper softphone application. The H.263+ CODEC has the best performance when paired with the PortGo softphone application. The H.263 CODEC and X-Lite softphone applications have the worst test results but still get “good” grades when tested using QoS, PSNR, and MOS parameters.

Open-access reader

About this research paper

What this paper is about

In a video call there are several components, such as IP phone or softphone, CODEC, and server. Selection of softphone and CODEC is a consideration in building a video communication network because it will affect the quality of video call. This research compare the quality of video calls based on softphone application and CODEC combination. The quality measured by QoS, PSNR, and MOS parameters.Softphone applications examined in this research are Blink, Zoiper, MicroSIP, PortGo, Linphone, and X-Lite. CODEC examined in this research are H.264, VP8, H.263+, and H.263. Each softphone application will be combined with a CODEC that is native to the softphone. There are nine combinations of softphone application and CODEC.Based on the research results, CODEC H.264 has the best performance when paired with the Blink softphone application. CODEC VP8 has the best performance when paired with the Zoiper softphone application. The H.263+ CODEC has the best performance when paired with the PortGo softphone application. The H.263 CODEC and X-Lite softphone applications have the worst test results but still get “good” grades when tested using QoS, PSNR, and MOS parameters.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 1 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

In a video call there are several components, such as IP phone or softphone, CODEC, and server. Selection of softphone and CODEC is a consideration in building a video communication network because it will affect the quality of video call. This research compare the quality of video calls based on softphone application and CODEC combination. The quality measured by QoS, PSNR, and MOS parameters.Softphone applications examined in this research are Blink, Zoiper, MicroSIP, PortGo, Linphone, and X-Lite. CODEC examined in this research are H.264, VP8, H.263+, and H.263. Each softphone application will be combined with a CODEC that is native to the softphone. There are nine combinations of softphone application and CODEC.Based on the research results, CODEC H.264 has the best performance when paired with the Blink softphone application. CODEC VP8 has the best performance when paired with the Zoiper softphone application. The H.263+ CODEC has the best performance when paired with the PortGo softphone application. The H.263 CODEC and X-Lite softphone applications have the worst test results but still get “good” grades when tested using QoS, PSNR, and MOS parameters.

Key concepts: Codec, Computer science, Adaptive Multi-Rate audio codec, Speech recognition, Computer hardware, Voice activity detection, Speech processing

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Analysis of Video CODEC Performance Using Different Softphone Applications — Research Paper | ScholarLens