Hey, I’m especially curious to hear more about the comparison results of Jitsi vs. BBB. Are they kind of the same? I ask, cause I’m evaluating video meeting solutions for a non-commercial education organization. And at the moment I cannot really test Jitsi vs. BBB with a greater number of users.
MCU is the old way of videoconferencing, it does not scale well with high numbers (you need a server farms) and it too centralized. On SFU you have can scale up to thousands or tenth of thousand of users. Moreover, you can SFU with e2e encryption (PERC project matrix protocol analysis.). In general, it is not necessary to transmit all the streams to all the participants. You have several options in order to save the bandwith.
I could not find any benchmark, but I’m experimenting with both solutions and recently with multiparty meeting too. Up to now, BBB is the solution that scales better with up to 100-150 user per room. BBB uses kurento and freeswitch as main components. Kurento is configured as SFU for HTML5 WebRTC client while freeswitch is used for audio conferencing to support SIP users too. The main drawback of BBB is that it relies on old software (ubuntu 16.04 still supported and nodejs 8 deprecated).
thanks, that already helps. I think, the ubuntu16-part is not so bad atm, but I also don’t like the nodejs8 part.
pinging @Arthur_TOUMASSIAN since he did some work with vp9 and libjitsi/videobridge1. Perhaps he is still around and is able to help! https://github.com/jitsi/jitsi-videobridge/issues/1133
I think jitsi should give the maximum priority on this. Many users are moving to multiparty meeting since it supports VP9, the video is considerably smoother, sharper, more synchronized and with higher resolution than jitsi.
My work done on JVB1 is only for plain VP9. To get full power of jitsi SFU we need an implementation of VP9 SVC. That’s what optimizes really the traffic.
However as the stable version is out, my company is willing to reimplment at least VP9 on JVB2. Because yes, there is huge difference. We managed to get nice 720p with VP9 with limitating bandwidth audio + video < 1000Kbps.
Thanks @Arthur_TOUMASSIAN for your time and contributions. I’m sure many will be looking foward to this!
I found two good discussions on the forum related to jitsi performance. I report here the main points:
- Room hard limit is 75 users, recommended 35 users.
- The limit with more than 15 users with camera is the user’s PC.
- Working test with a good bare metal servers, 115 mute users and 5 users with camera.
- Test in progress for 500 simultaneous users.
Have you had any luck yet? Do you have this work in some public repo where we can collaborate? I too need to get this implemented ASAP and would like to help where I can .
Additionally if youre close, any idea when you would be finished? Or a ROM of time left?
Check here : Flagship VP9 Support: Notes and Discussion
A good comparison in terms of features among jitsi, multiparty meeting and BBB.
I have tested Jitsi Meet, BigBluebutton, OpenMeetings, Kopano, Nextcloud Talk, Teams, Zoom and Hangouts and these are my observations
Bigbluebutton is extremely resource hungry. Also, the processor load can go up really quickly unless you are using a Dedicated Server with sufficient resources because it uses the system clock for synchronization.
OpenMeetings is an interesting open source platform but comparing Jitsi to openmeetings would be like comparing apples to oranges because both have different use cases. Jitsi can run on Servers with minimal resources and in terms of performance outperforms OpenMeetings. Setting Up Openmeetings is much harder when compared to Jitsi.
Teams, Hangouts etc are proprietary solutions and you cant even compare it with Jitsi which is entirely open source.
Teams uses too much of your bandwidth and I have noticed that while using it on the Mobile, my Mobile gets heated up very quickly and the audio clarity drops if you are on a slow Network.
Nextcloud Talk is limited in the number of participants that you can have in a single meeting. Quality of the Call is good but you can’t exceed 6 participants in a single Call.
After evaluating all the above Platforms, I would strongly recommend Jitsi.
In my view, What works in favor of Jitsi are
- Fantastic Team behind the product
- Very supportive Team. There has not been a single question I have posted in the community which has gone unanswered. The Jitsi Team is extremely patient and generally responds very fast to each question, considering the number of questions asked on a daily basis(That’s some patience indeed).
- Open Source and still going strong despite several acquisitions
- Fantastic Community, always willing to help each other
- Most open source Social Network Platforms now have Jitsi Integration possible. That’s a huge plus point, which proprietary solutions can’t match.
- Every time I aspired for a new feature, the Jitsi team has come up with that feature in a very short span of time. That clearly shows that the Jitsi Team is listening to the voices of the community members. What more can one expect?
That’s my dispassionate assessment of all these Platforms. I strongly recommend that we support Open Source initiatives in any which way possible despite their mild shortcomings. Nothings Perfect but Jitsi is getting there one step at a time
Even though this gets off-topic, I want to second this statement. When I first came to this forums I was deeply impressed by the patience and kindness with which even the core devs reply to (often self-inflicted) user problems on a regular basis. I think this is somewhat underappreciated, so: Huge thanks to everyone from the Jitsi team for keeping this habit throughout the particularly stressful past months!
I like this community thanks to jitsi teams, it’will be great if we can have some tool like zoom, tools to write and draw whit board.
An interesting project to benchmark jitsi and eduMeet.
This is my testing Jitsi with jvb2