Video.js vs Jwplayer Speed Test Results for VOD Contents
Video.js and JW Player are video player’s that are most widely used in the industry for the playback of live and VOD contents. It has always been a dilemma when it comes to choosing the one that is best suited for our requirement. To make the choice with ease, analysis speed test results for these two players is presented below.
Video.js
- Video.js is customisable (Developer can edit the videojs code for additional functionality).
- It is completely free.
- Adaptive RTMP and HDS manifest are not supported.
JW Player
- Can provide JW player SMIL manifests for live and VOD content delivered over RTMP.
- Requires payment for advanced features.
- Support advertisement.
As HLS stream divides the source into short chunks of multiple file at different data rates,The speed of the playback player’s can be tested using the load time of Hls Chunks.
Fig 1:- HLS uses multiple encoded files with index files directing the player to different
streams and chunks of audio/video data within those streams.
For testing, A player page having both JW player and Video.js is created and closely monitored the time taken to load the ts file at three different time intervals.
Time interval 1:-
Fig 2:- Network console log for the time interval 1
| Packet number | JW player(s) | Video.js(s) |
| 0 | 4.25 | 3.71 |
| 1 | 3.97 | 3.91 |
| 2 | 4.00 | 5.01 |
| 3 | 4.73 | 3.95 |
| 4 | 3.68 | 3.95 |
| 5 | 4.48 | 4.49 |
| Total | 25.11 | 25.02 |
Table 1 :– Time intervals of chunk list in time interval 1
Time taken to load 6 HLS chunks in JW player = 25.11 s
Time taken to load 6 HLS chunks in Video.js = 25.02 s
Time Interval 2:-
Fig 3:-Network console log for the time interval 2
| Packet number | JW player(s) | Video.js(s) |
| 0 | 5.88 | 4.01 |
| 1 | 5.32 | 3.75 |
| 2 | 4.27 | 5.35 |
| 3 | 4.81 | 4.80 |
| 4 | 4.55 | 5.57 |
| 5 | 4.29 | 4.53 |
| Total | 29.12 | 28.01 |
Table 2 :– Time intervals of chunk list in time interval 2
Time taken to load 6 HLS chunks in JW player = 29.12 s
Time taken to load 6 HLS chunks in Video.js = 28.01 s
Time Interval 3:-
Fig 4:-Network console log for the time interval 3
| Packet number | JW pLayer(s) | Video.js(s) |
| 0 | 4.72 | 4.80 |
| 1 | 5.02 | 5.02 |
| 2 | 4.53 | 4.17 |
| 3 | 4.49 | 4.16 |
| 4 | 4.49 | 5.02 |
| 5 | 5.22 | 3.98 |
| Total | 28.47 | 27.15 |
Table 3 :– Time intervals of chunk list in time interval 3
Time taken to load 6 HLS chunks in JW player = 28.47 s
Time taken to load 6 HLS chunks in Video.js = 27.15 s
Average Time Taken:-
JW player = (25.11+29.12+28.47)/3=27.57 s
Video.js = (25.02+28.01+27.15)/3=26.73 s
The average time taken by JW player is more than that of Video.js. Clearly stating that the Video.js loads stream faster than JW player.
