the strong points of foobar2000 seem to be high quality (32-bit) decoding of audio, suited for high end sound cards... but other than that, the interface is downright disappointing. I can't even see a volume control!
If you are looking for a simple media player, with small footprint, this is the player! I can even play Counter-Strike while listening to my favorite musics! I've compared Windows Media Player x Foobar2000 relative to resource hogging. Look how impressive the results are: Process wmplayer foobar2000 % Processor Time 9.112 0.031 IO Data KBytes/sec 34 15 Page Faults/sec 54.712 2.050 Page File MBytes 124 5 Working Set MBytes 21.0 2.5 s, Moroni from Brazil!
The table is all messed up... so, in short, WMP uses 9% of processor time and 21MB of memory against Foobar2000 that uses 0.03% of processor time and 2.5MB of memory in my comparison test (7 ogg musics, 30min total)!
If you want functionality, exceptional sound, and 'discrete' usage of system resources over looks -- hands down, Foobar2000 is IT!! Skins and fancy gui's are for n00bs anyways... Get to know your keyboard commands; ie "+" or "-" on the number keypad for volume control - how much easier can it be? My 2 cents. g_dub
i can play any audio file with foobar, including AUDIO-CD, DTS, Dolby Digital, OGG and so on. Almost everithing I need is there already. BTW volume control is one of DSP optional plugins...
Comment posting temporarily disabled due to abuse (spamming attempts)