G.722 vs. iLBC

Attribute	G.722	iLBC
Bitrate	64 kbps	15.2 kbps
Algorithm	ADPCM	LPC
Complexity	High	Low
Delay	10 ms	20 ms

Introduction

When it comes to choosing a codec for voice communication over the internet, there are several options available. Two popular choices are G.722 and iLBC. Both codecs have their own set of attributes that make them suitable for different scenarios. In this article, we will compare the attributes of G.722 and iLBC to help you make an informed decision on which codec to use.

Audio Quality

One of the most important factors to consider when choosing a codec is audio quality. G.722 is known for its high audio quality, providing clear and crisp sound. It operates at a bitrate of 64 kbps, which allows for better sound reproduction compared to lower bitrate codecs. On the other hand, iLBC is designed to prioritize bandwidth efficiency over audio quality. It operates at a lower bitrate of 13.3 kbps, which can result in lower audio quality compared to G.722.

Bandwidth Usage

Another important consideration when choosing a codec is bandwidth usage. G.722 requires a higher bitrate of 64 kbps, which means it consumes more bandwidth compared to iLBC. This can be a disadvantage in scenarios where bandwidth is limited or expensive. On the other hand, iLBC operates at a lower bitrate of 13.3 kbps, making it more bandwidth-efficient. This makes iLBC a better choice for situations where conserving bandwidth is a priority.

Compatibility

Compatibility is another factor to consider when choosing a codec. G.722 is a widely supported codec that is compatible with a wide range of devices and platforms. This makes it a versatile choice for voice communication applications. iLBC, on the other hand, may have limited compatibility with some devices and platforms. This can be a drawback if you need to ensure compatibility across a variety of systems.

Packet Loss Resilience

Packet loss resilience is an important attribute for codecs used in voice communication over the internet. G.722 is known for its robustness against packet loss, thanks to its higher bitrate and error correction capabilities. This makes G.722 a reliable choice for scenarios where packet loss is a concern. iLBC, on the other hand, may struggle with packet loss due to its lower bitrate and lack of error correction mechanisms. This can result in degraded audio quality during periods of high packet loss.

Complexity

The complexity of a codec can also be a factor to consider when choosing between G.722 and iLBC. G.722 is a more complex codec compared to iLBC, which can impact processing power and resource usage. This may be a consideration in scenarios where system resources are limited. iLBC, on the other hand, is a simpler codec that requires less processing power and resources. This can be an advantage in scenarios where efficiency is a priority.

Conclusion

In conclusion, both G.722 and iLBC have their own set of attributes that make them suitable for different scenarios. G.722 excels in audio quality and packet loss resilience, making it a reliable choice for scenarios where these attributes are important. On the other hand, iLBC prioritizes bandwidth efficiency and simplicity, making it a better choice for scenarios where conserving bandwidth and system resources is a priority. Ultimately, the choice between G.722 and iLBC will depend on your specific requirements and priorities for voice communication over the internet.