I will just make things clear. TCP/UDP are two cars are that being driven on the road. suppose that traffic signs & obstacles are Errors TCP cares for traffic signs, respects everything around. Slow driving because something may happen to the car. While UDP just drives off, full speed no respect to street signs. Nothing, a mad driver. UDP doesn't have error recovery, If there's an obstacle, it will just collide with it then continue. While TCP makes sure that all packets are sent & received perfectly, No errors , so , the car just passes obstacles without colliding. I hope this is a good example for you to understand, Why UDP is preferred in gaming. Gaming needs speed. TCP is preffered in downloads, or downloaded files may be corrupted.

如果你需要在两个还没有通话的IP之间快速发送消息，那么UDP到达的速度至少要快3倍，通常是5倍。

具有容错功能

你是说“容忍损失”吗?

基本上，UDP不是“容错”的。你可以发送100个包给某人，他们可能只收到其中的95个包，有些包的顺序可能是错误的。

对于视频流媒体和多人游戏之类的东西，错过一个数据包总比延迟它后面的所有其他数据包要好，这是显而易见的选择

然而，对于大多数其他事情，丢失或“重新排列”的数据包是至关重要的。你必须编写一些额外的代码来运行在UDP之上，以便在遗漏内容时重试，并强制执行正确的顺序。这在某些地方会增加一点开销。

值得庆幸的是，一些非常非常聪明的人已经做到了这一点，他们称之为TCP。

可以这样想:如果一个数据包丢失了，您是希望尽快获得下一个数据包并继续(使用UDP)，还是您实际上需要丢失的数据(使用TCP)。开销并不重要，除非你在一个真正的边缘情况下。

如果不考虑网络情况，只讨论TCP或UDP是没有意义的。 如果两点之间的网络质量非常高，UDP绝对比TCP快，但在其他一些情况下，如GPRS网络，TCP可能比UDP更快，更可靠。

UDP比TCP快，原因很简单，因为它不存在允许连续数据包流的确认数据包(ACK)，而不是使用TCP窗口大小和往返时间(RTT)来确认一组数据包的TCP。

要了解更多信息，我推荐简单但非常容易理解的Skullbox解释(TCP vs. UDP)

Which protocol performs better (in terms of throughput) - UDP or TCP - really depends on the network characteristics and the network traffic. Robert S. Barnes, for example, points out a scenario where TCP performs better (small-sized writes). Now, consider a scenario in which the network is congested and has both TCP and UDP traffic. Senders in the network that are using TCP, will sense the 'congestion' and cut down on their sending rates. However, UDP doesn't have any congestion avoidance or congestion control mechanisms, and senders using UDP would continue to pump in data at the same rate. Gradually, TCP senders would reduce their sending rates to bare minimum and if UDP senders have enough data to be sent over the network, they would hog up the majority of bandwidth available. So, in such a case, UDP senders will have greater throughput, as they get the bigger pie of the network bandwidth. In fact, this is an active research topic - How to improve TCP throughput in presence of UDP traffic. One way, that I know of, using which TCP applications can improve throughput is by opening multiple TCP connections. That way, even though, each TCP connection's throughput might be limited, the sum total of the throughput of all TCP connections may be greater than the throughput for an application using UDP.