Jump to content

7z or RAR?


Jordan de Souza

Recommended Posts

Jordan de Souza

I wish to know what format have the better compression ratio [latest software] and the better unpack ratio!

Feel free to tell me other format that is faster.

Also software recommendations are welcome.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Replies 16
  • Views 1.9k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Take a look at this benchmark from PeaZip and decide for yourself.

I have read other benchmarks for compression tools and PeaZip always comes out on top when you consider the compression ratio and speed together.

Thanks. :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Jordan de Souza

Take a look at this benchmark from PeaZip and decide for yourself.

I have read other benchmarks for compression tools and PeaZip always comes out on top when you consider the compression ratio and speed together.

Thanks. :D

Thank you for your reply.

Also i have been reading a lot of information on this website: http://www.maximumcompression.com/index.html

there is a intriguing "faq" on the lower section of this page: http://www.maximumcompression.com/data/summary_sf.php

So for everyday users, like me, they recommend 7zip or Winrar.

I have being reading a bit of the ARC format... maybe if the new groups start releasing in this format it became popular... seems overall greater than rar and 7z format.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


WinRAR is usually the everyday choice.. Now its is sort of split and can depend on your system as for which one you prefer.. Some would say 7zip actually has better compression for some files types while WinRAR has better on others... When it comes to decompressing.. some users with different ( older ) chips state they have better performance out of WinRAR... while 7zip will take longer and not show much more compression for the loss in time and resource usage for decompression.... WinRAR IMO.. is a good balance between the two but if I am looking for security I go with PGP Desktop ... Thought I still do use the options in WinRAR..

There are other formats and methods of using compression and decompression as well as other format available.. Some can depend upon the hardware and tech that it is being performed on due to the computations and other aspects as I understand it..safety is a consideration for some which also alters that decision... while it may not seem relative to offering the best choice.. it is a consideration of options and available functions.. While some may see operable aspects a favorable plus over another..it may not offer the level of encryption nor protection that another might...and thus the decision is made for other reasons...

Really just asking which one is not really a straight forward question where it may seem as much.. to those who use it for simplicity sake on a daily basis.. it may seem as much...or only uses it to access files online or from downloads...

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Jordan de Souza

WinRAR is usually the everyday choice.. Now its is sort of split and can depend on your system as for which one you prefer.. Some would say 7zip actually has better compression for some files types while WinRAR has better on others... When it comes to decompressing.. some users with different ( older ) chips state they have better performance out of WinRAR... while 7zip will take longer and not show much more compression for the loss in time and resource usage for decompression.... WinRAR IMO.. is a good balance between the two but if I am looking for security I go with PGP Desktop ... Thought I still do use the options in WinRAR..

There are other formats and methods of using compression and decompression as well as other format available.. Some can depend upon the hardware and tech that it is being performed on due to the computations and other aspects as I understand it..safety is a consideration for some which also alters that decision... while it may not seem relative to offering the best choice.. it is a consideration of options and available functions.. While some may see operable aspects a favorable plus over another..it may not offer the level of encryption nor protection that another might...and thus the decision is made for other reasons...

Really just asking which one is not really a straight forward question where it may seem as much.. to those who use it for simplicity sake on a daily basis.. it may seem as much...or only uses it to access files online or from downloads...

Thank you for your reply...

As far as I tested now, peazip[freearc 0.666] with 7z format and PPMd compression on ultra is the best time/compression ratio. Arc is better overall when multiple types of files are in game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Administrator

When comparing both WinRAR and 7-Zip. 7-Zip, in most cases will give you better compression. Also, 7-Zip properly utilizes all my cores to compress/extract. WinRAR on the other hand, inspite of enabling all the cores/multi-core thing, takes ages to do the same. But, none the less, .rar is a standard format in scene.

If you really want higher compression, try something like KGB Archiver, may take days to compress/decompress, but worth it. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Yeah I remember Marik talking about KGB a long time ago... Wonder what it would be like on good board with dual processors? :think:

Link to comment
Share on other sites


AlienForce1

If you want high compression rate - take a look at Uwe Herklotz`s uharc , download here

Based on the original uharc , Sam Gleske developed a free version (UHARC CMD) that integrates in Windows shell , download here

Link to comment
Share on other sites


madeinheaven

The COMPRESSION Test (7Zip, RAR, Arc, UHARC, KGB)

The compression test using a variety of compression utilities!

FILE INFORMATION

File Name: THE COMPUTER MORE THAN A MACHINE.doc

Type of file: Microsoft Office Word 97 - 2003 Document

Size: 72.0 KB (73,728 bytes)

Size on disk: 36.0 KB (36,864 bytes)

File Hashes:

CRC32: 58AFC5A9

MD5: 0A71F259ED91906C13FC6773ADDEBB8B

Whirlpool: A32276F24BEF9C8E06A90A0CCE7F127438EB1FE414EF454FD76EBDD0F475FDFC9EBACEF5E5DD93B51B859DE83D67206908D6309A14D20700260A2666860C04E8

AFTER COMPRESSION ( AT HIGEST SETTINGS AVALIABLE)

RAR

File Name: THE COMPUTER MORE THAN A MACHINE.rar

Type of file: WinRAR archive

Size: 21.5 KB (22,079 bytes)

Size on disk: 21.5 KB (22,079 bytes)

Ratio: 29%

File Hashes:

CRC32: A677D6DD

MD5: BAE96A58E64FC85E94EBAE7B57063D8A

Whirlpool: 814AD9F02D931007ACDD3A24A94064F8406560F326B10588BC0219C7A6A7EE7B608F1C8ED944C166BF822BED0C7D694033389F896AE5092AB85D982BD31F0EA8

7zip

File Name: THE COMPUTER MORE THAN A MACHINE.7z

File Type: 7z

Size: 19.9 KB (20,421 bytes)

Size on disk: 19.9 KB (20,421 bytes)

RATIO: 27%

File Hashes:

CRC32: 7D82CA20

MD5: 88512BF0DA1B3C5D3935D538BDCC0351

Whirlpool: 8BFCAA1B4F949B28EAFF38231DEB684DDFA0D3DA1DB0C3EE92AA0B7CAF58CFCA654E7252557651D28AECEAC54B4D94C4FA91B0F0521F410CA3EDC8C35F2F4088

ARC

File Name: THE COMPUTER MORE THAN A MACHINE.arc

File Type: FreeArc archive

Size: 18.7 KB (19,245 bytes)

Size on disk: 18.7 KB (19,245 bytes)

Ratio: 25.7%

File Hashes:

CRC32: C479ABC8

MD5: 2FF7CFC26A3841EACB833B40F509BE4E

Whirlpool: A21257837ED5E11387890D712CA60C4620CA82DEF43176E1F6E2C883C76BBE28EE24A816D91E47A9A3CE9A0B3AC0787E0273155A722DC448D5FB076EB5313A91

UHARC

File Name: THE COMPUTER MORE THAN A MACHINE.uha

File Type: UHARC

Size: 17.5 KB (18,005 bytes)

Size on disk: 17.5 KB (18,005 bytes)

Ratio: 24.3%

File Hashes:

CRC32: 41C25B4F

MD5: FDA707EDF96BEB1683905E67F8252EF7

Whirlpool: 0D621308455D56330BFB0BF42BCB8D2B6BC308EB93318D2A6C6842642D2DA365AC3ADD1A2865A366D8B6AB7CAB95207D8F230064E6E842ADA1B449D375005230

KGB

File Name: THE COMPUTER MORE THAN A MACHINE.kgb

File Type: KGB v2

Size: 16.4 KB (16,804 bytes)

Size on disk: 16.4 KB (16,804 bytes)

Ratio: 22.7%

File Hashes:

CRC32: 699FF4E9

MD5: 18460DACDE1DFA8F985FDD7D835270FC

Whirlpool: D90751F5851D6362A052CDCE59A0722F6F14BEE784F26E690E357CD6CB7AECE69E47A818238274C2E5E31F363B8D3D781CDC1D014026E912465E9E8CAA87D922

Winrar vs. 7Zip vs. Winzip Best File Compression Compared

This video compares speed and compression rates for winrar, 7zip, winzip and window’s built-in zip utility. I used a mixed of photoshop/png images, and the program files folder to test. Run on Windows 7 64-bit. Result: 7Zip had the best compression, but winrar was almost as good and much faster. Winzip fell behind in all areas. Built-in zip was fairly fast but didn’t offer good compression. See video for more details.

Video Rating: 4 / 5

Link to comment
Share on other sites


I myself prefer RAR and WinRAR; and suggest you this for like other says, everyday use.

It's very light and stable and compress/decompress almost all archive formats and it's very popular too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Jordan de Souza

Thank you for all your replies... after taking a deeper look for a everyday user like me, i think the best solution in program terms would be Peazip since it uses both freearc 0.666 and 7 zip compression methods all in one software with the winrar interface and speedier decompression compared to winrar. So... For now, i'd using peazip for decompress and kgb for compressing, problem with kgb is that it takes like a life to goes true. But final results may worth in some cases.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


7-Zip is slow as hell when you want to gain extra bytes.

WinRAR for me. I prefer faster methods, and i even use WinRAR ZIP compression in big files.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


It doesn't matter which for as long as it can extracts common archives. But I use Winrar.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


7-Zip is slow as hell when you want to gain extra bytes.

WinRAR for me. I prefer faster methods, and i even use WinRAR ZIP compression in big files.

Me too. )

Link to comment
Share on other sites


winrar won the war period. back in the late 90's you had to have rar, winrar, ace, winace, arc etc. its so much better having one that will open everything and is friendly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Jordan de Souza

Thank you for your replies... Well... I'm a winrar user since the day i started needing decompressing software, back in the 90's but I'm also an enthusiast I wish you guys give a try on the peazip... the only thing i dont find out was the "view" feature on the winrar, other than that is heavily user friendly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • 2 weeks later...

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...