The first version of this article has elicited passionate responses from many readers. Some people have come out in support of VLC, while others are proponents of MPC-HC or Windows Media Player, with a preference for some codec packs. This is the sort of comparison I really didn't want to make in the article. However, I do feel it is now pertinent to add a few notes.

VLC's Target Audience

VLC is targeted at the lowest common denominator of computer users. We are talking about users for whom the average Anandtech reader actually sets up a newly purchased PC or does tech support for. This is not to say that VLC doesn't have its utility for power users. There is no 'one-size-fits-all' media player. VLC used to be one, but with the advent of HD media, it ceased to be. MPC-HC is trying to be one, but it is not so convincing in its current state.

VLC is Bloatware

A reader in a private communication accuses VLC of being bloatware, and praises MPC-HC for being light and fast. VLC used to be light and fast in its early days too. As more and more functionality is added, and people request more and more features, there is no guarantee that MPC-HC will continue to remain so. Software application development goes through these stages, and past a particular point, it becomes bloatware (Adobe Acrobat Reader is a case in point). At some point or the other, the developers realize this, and rewrite parts of the application / implement acceleration of some sort. I hope (and believe) VLC's development is at that stage now. It is probably too late for VLC to shift to the approach used by MPC-HC / mplayer-VDPAU of having separate development for Windows and Linux platforms. This could have resulted in more efficient code.

One also has to remember that VLC has support for more file formats and containers than any other player considered standalone. It is a framework, with support for scripting in order to further functionality (using Lua). Consider a RMVB file with RMVB video and Cook audio. VLC has had the capability to play such a file since the last 5 or 10 releases. I just tried opening one in MPC-HC, and ended up with a 'cannot render pins in graph because some codec or filter not installed'. On the same system, at the same time, VLC plays back the file without issues. If a tech noob sees this, would you fault him for preferring VLC to MPC-HC?  Despite being a power user, I believe in installing as few programs / codec packs as possible in order to get the file to playback, and VLC fits this criterion. Yes, we all know RMVB is on the way out, but that is no excuse not to support it.

VLC's DXVA Implementation

The VLC developers are more interested in the framework and multi-platform support with a unified code base, rather than just the media player capability. I do have my reservations about their approach, in case they want to compete with MPC-HC's capabilities. I see comments on the article comparing DXVA acceleration on MPC-HC with that of VLC right now, and declarations that MPC-HC is light years ahead. Of course, and that is the reason why MPC-HC is not shown in the graphs. Let us give some chance to VLC to improve their DXVA implementation. MPC-HC has been implementing DXVA since March 2007. It has taken them 3 years to come where it is now. VLC has just started out on this. It is not fair to put them down for this reason.

That said, I am not sure the VLC developers reached out to the GPU vendors enough. A quick search on various AV forums / Google reveals technical contacts for Nvidia and Intel. ATI is a different story, but we do see some marketing managers on Twitter (like CatalystMaker). I am sure all three would have been more than willing to help out a project like VLC. The GPU acceleration could have been in RC versions till all the kinks were ironed out. To the defence of the developers, they do mark the feature as 'experimental'.

Wait! MPC-HC is more popular than VLC!

A reader in a private communication took issue with my statement that VLC is much more popular than MPC-HC. While it might be difficult to quantify this statement, the reader went on to suggest that this was completely false. I was curious and wanted to dig up some numbers. For statistical purposes, as of 25th June, 2010, SourceForge reports less than 10 million downloads of MPC-HC (all standalone filters / 32 and 64 bit versions put together) since v1.0.4 (last 4 years). On the other hand, VLC on the Windows platform seems to have had more than 150 million downloads (and this doesn't include the latest release) since v1.0.0 (last 1 year). Given these statistics, VLC seems to be more popular, though I do agree that MPC-HC has some advanced technical merits.

The reader also happened to mention that, according to MPC-HC's project manager, Microsoft told him MPC-HC is the second most used video player on Windows after WMP (can't beat the bundled apps). I have been keeping track of MPC-HC development on Doom9 on and off, and vaguely remembered something like this being discussed over there. I managed to dig up three posts, one on why MPC-HC's executable name was changed from mplayerc.exe to mpc-hc.exe, and the other two detailing some communication from Microsoft regarding the high volume of MPC-HC crash reports.

Apparently, mplayerc.exe crashed so often on Windows systems a year or two back, that Microsoft got flooded with error reports from customers noting MPC-HC as the culprit. I am unable to find a statement from tetsuo55 (MPC-HC project manager's username on Doom9) on the net backing up what the reader sent in, but if it is true, I think it is easy to see why Microsoft may have reported that MPC-HC is the second most popular media player (I don't think they have any way to track which media player is being used on their OS, other than by using the error reports, right?)

I am not suggesting that MPC-HC is unstable (after all, these error reports were from the original Media Player Classic, and the issues have been fixed for quite some time now) or denying that MPC-HC is currently the best option to play HD videos on Windows, but when one considers the whole ecosystem (SD as well as HD video, and all codecs and file formats), I would think VLC has a much larger installed base. This is also supported by the download statistics at the beginning of this section.

VLC - One of the Best Open Source Softwares?

One reader in a private communication took offence when I termed VLC as one of the best open source softwares of all time, citing that MPC-HC annihilated it on Windows and Mplayer / VDPAU did the same on Linux. He also cited frequent commits and community activity in the MPC-HC repository as indications that MPC-HC deserved recognition as a better open source software than VLC. While his statements on performance may be true, we believe one should not take away credit from VLC, considering where and how it started, and where it is now. MPC-HC is indeed a great program with a very active development community. So, the commits and updates to the program are frequent. However, one also has to note that the project is quite new compared to VLC, which is much more stable and already has had a lot of development behind it.

The problem with VLC is that its initial development was done in the days when GPU acceleration of video decode was unheard of, and HD videos were non-existent. It is now trying to cover lost ground, and this must definitely be appreciated and supported. It has started taking steps on the way to becoming the Swiss army knife of the media player world once again. I would also offer the opinion that VLC developers should take some leaves out of the MPC-HC books in order to implement DXVA better. After all, one of the biggest advantages of being open source is co-operation. There is always space for two players in this field.

Note on Codec Packs

Codec packs are usually a mess to maintain. Even tech savvy users find it very easy to shoot themselves in the foot. What works on one system might conflict with another system (unless it is a clean and fresh OS installation). So, it is probably not something one should consider for the type of users mentioned in the first section on this page.

Just for disclosure purposes, I repeat one of my comments here: On my HTPC, MKV / M2TS files default to MPC-HC, while all other formats open in VLC. No codec packs are installed. I love MPC-HC for providing me with the best interface and experience while watching high definition stuff, but that doesn't mean I consider VLC any less worthy for what it does.

Final Words
Comments Locked

74 Comments

View All Comments

  • vfigueira - Monday, June 28, 2010 - link

    1201N

    I have a 3g Usb Modem (ZTE MF622) and a bluetooth mice (Genius Navigator BT905).

    I use the 1201N manly for internet and movies on the move.

    If i only use internet, the battery lasts a little more than 3 hours.
    If i only use it for movies (hd content) i last more than 2 hours but less than 3.

    The user experience is not bad, but could be better.
    I had for a little time a Acer 1810T with a SU2300 and the experience was better.
    Windows Media Player with K-lite, played Hd content flawless and smooth, and battery life was way better than 1201N.

    The atom 330 is always at full power.
    Asus should be working in a bios version, which could downclock the processor and support AHCI. The only 2 faults worth mentioning.

    All the players i used, are the latest version.
  • smartalco - Sunday, June 27, 2010 - link

    I still always have VLC installed because I have yet to find any video it won't play in 4 years. I very rarely watch movies on my computer (never blu-ray), and have a decent quad core, so CPU usage isn't a problem. When I find a video that VLC can't handle, I might consider something else. In the meantime, on with the performance increase!
  • MrSpadge - Sunday, June 27, 2010 - link

    Personally I don't like VLCs interface much and prefer ZoomPlayer. But seeing them adress this important topic with its diverse problems is very good and will ensure that I also keep VLC installed for all the cases ZoomPlayer can't handle.
    And thanks to Anandtech for testing - this is certainly not a trivial task. As becomes obvious to me when I consider all the abreviations in this article which don't tell me anything, except "probably somehow video related".
  • archer75 - Sunday, June 27, 2010 - link

    It has everything built in! And it's still the preferred player of choice for HTPC's.
  • Shadowmaster625 - Monday, June 28, 2010 - link

    I have many avi files from 2005-2009 that used to play just fine on VLC. Now they don't work. It is retarded. I complain how WMP doesnt play certain mp3's, but this is just as annoying.
  • david007 - Monday, June 28, 2010 - link

    Mpc hc supports most of the codecs except few odd ones (real and quicktime) out of the box without having to install the codec packs, so why use vlc for other formats than mkv?
  • Nx6 - Monday, June 28, 2010 - link

    Interesting article, but it would be much more useful if there was some comparison to other CPU-only and/or GPU-assisted decoders such as CoreAVC.
  • PR3ACH3R - Tuesday, June 29, 2010 - link

    Thanks for the review, & for mentioning just how badly ATI have neglected their Blue Screening, Lockup Causing, DPC Spiking horrible DXVA drivers.

    I would be eternally grateful, if/when the fixed ati drivers ever come your way, if you can also check for these problems, that have been ignored in Anandtech for way too long:

    http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=18...
  • ganeshts - Thursday, July 1, 2010 - link

    Thanks for the forum post link.

    I will try to take these issues up with ATI once I have a testbed with their new card set up.
  • PR3ACH3R - Saturday, July 3, 2010 - link

    Thank you very much for your reply.
    God bless you for taking it on, this has been going on since the 5xxx launch & has been ignored here so far.

    Please fill us all in on this when possible,
    All The Best.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now