You'd prefer QTCreator to VS/Code::Blocks, even though he doesn't use any of that QT stuff? I always thought the IDE was designed to work well with design-your-own-gui-in-the-other-tab and would be useless if you want to write something else.
I prefer QtCreator over Code::Blocks, even when not using the Qt API. (I haven't tried Visual Studio)
Yes, it has built-in support for Qt and has a drag-and-drop GUI wizard, but it's perfectly usable without Qt, and is an excellent C++ IDE (and is cross-platform).
It has built-in support for Mercurial, SVN, Git, Bazaar, CVS, and other source control systems, if you want it, and support for CMake (though it uses its own QMake system by default, which I found easy to learn and sufficient for my needs), its intellisense is excellent too. It is very stable and rarely crashes (which are usually because MinGW crashes). Its syntax highlighting support for C++11 is mostly good, and improving, but it has a few problems with pre-compiled headers and debugging (which are both really MinGW/GCC's fault).