C++ Compiler and IDE

Well, IDE's normally come with compilers, and using a specific compiler probably won't matter to you.

Visual Studio -- Good debugger, Intellisense is great for working with classes / functions. I definitely recommend it, it's what I use now.

Code::Blocks -- Has an Intellisense-like property, and fills in a lot of stuff for you (Automatically puts in brackets / parenthesis) In my use it had a lot of good features, however linking it with libraries is a pain. I switched to Visual C++ from this. I believe this IDE is great for beginners, however when you get into using lots of libraries, more advanced programs, debugging, Visual Studio is the way to go.

Xcode -- Never used, but if you're on a mac I've heard it's the best.

GNU isn't a C++ compiler. GNU is a organization that makes a C++ compiler called "GCC".
GCC isn't natively on Windows but the MinGW project is a port (among other things) of GCC.

What operating system are you running? If Linux, GCC is probably the way to go.

Clang is new (an Apple-backed opensource project), but growing and looks like it'll be great. However, it's Windows support seems to be lacking (last I checked, anyways).

Microsoft's C++ compiler and their IDE is really good. (Microsoft Visual Studio) Windows only.

I personally use QtCreator with GCC... except GCC isn't for Windows, so I have to use the Windows port of it, called "MinGW".
I really like QtCreator. QtCreator is for Windows, Mac, and Linux.

Code::Blocks is another IDE. I think it also uses MinGW by default.

Compilers: GCC/MinGW, Clang,
IDEs: Visual Studio, QtCreator, Code::Blocks

I recommend Visual Studio if you only intend to use Windows, or QtCreator if you intend to go cross-platform.

I recommend Visual Studio if you only intend to use Windows, or QtCreator if you intend to go cross-platform.

Seconded. Code::Blocks is also pretty good.

One good thing about Code::Blocks is that by default it supports a ton of compilers, besides its pretty fast.

I'm very happy with Eclipse.

Personally I'm using Visual Studio 2012 and I believe it's best what you can get on Windows.

GCC isn't natively on Windows but the MinGW project is a port (among other things) of GCC.

I think you mean "the native port of GCC for Microsoft Windows is called MinGW". GCC isn't "for" any particular target, I used it on VAX/VMS and Atari TOS long before Linux, Mac OS X, or Microsoft Windows came along. The only time it's non-native is when it's a cross compiler -- and MinGW is actually available on Linux for building Windows apps with, if yuo're in to pain.

Yes, that's sortof what I meant, though I phrased it poorly. What I meant to say is that the GCCprojectdoesn't provide native binaries of the GCC compiler for Windows (Windows as a host), but that the MinGW project provides native binaries of the GCC compiler for Windows, and also that the MinGW project provides more than just the GCC compiler (it includes some other GNU tools (binutils), and optionally MSYS as well).

For the code editor abilities QtCreator is probably one of the bests I came across so far, it's syntax highlighting, code completion and automatic formatting are pretty advanced and I have yet to see Visual Studio reach this level of editor. However it is lacking a bit when it comes to debugging and specially to managing larger projects, probably as it was originally designed to be used for GUI development, and not for large scale game engine development. Code::Blocks and Visual Studio have a nicer project configuration dialog to setup various settings, but the code editor is less advanced.

Thanks guys!

Netbeans is nice and clear, good for beginners: http://netbeans.org/

Dev c++ is an alternative

Dev c++ is an alternative

The original Bloodshed Dev-C++ is horribly outdated and broken, and there are a number of good reasons it should never be used. It's ridden with bugs that will never be fixed, it lacks features, and it's not supported. It can also be difficult simply getting it to run on more recent operating systems.

There are however two different updated versions that are alright to use -- they still wouldn't be my choice, but I can't really fault them in any major way apart from the fact that using a relatively unpopular IDE means reduced help and support.