WinRar v 7z - and the winner is...
-
Dash my buttons! I've been using 7z for a long time and I use it for my important end-of-day backups. I recently tried experimenting with WinRar's command line offering, rar.exe. Using the same input folder and with maximum compression rar.exe compressed the input to about 247Mb. I then compared that to 7z's file which I do with normal compression; 7z's file is 78Mb. I only wanted to look at WinRar because 7z doesn't play nicely if I try and extract multiple archives at the same time. Under some circumstances, 7z locks up if I do. But really, 247Mb v 78Mb is a good endorsement for 7z. I can live with 7z's odd behaviour. The general caveat applies: you mileage might vary.
If there is one thing more dangerous than getting between a bear and her cubs it's getting between my wife and her chocolate.
-
Dash my buttons! I've been using 7z for a long time and I use it for my important end-of-day backups. I recently tried experimenting with WinRar's command line offering, rar.exe. Using the same input folder and with maximum compression rar.exe compressed the input to about 247Mb. I then compared that to 7z's file which I do with normal compression; 7z's file is 78Mb. I only wanted to look at WinRar because 7z doesn't play nicely if I try and extract multiple archives at the same time. Under some circumstances, 7z locks up if I do. But really, 247Mb v 78Mb is a good endorsement for 7z. I can live with 7z's odd behaviour. The general caveat applies: you mileage might vary.
If there is one thing more dangerous than getting between a bear and her cubs it's getting between my wife and her chocolate.
Septimus Hedgehog wrote:
The general caveat applies: you mileage might vary.
...and objects in the archive are smaller than they appear.
Those who fail to learn history are doomed to repeat it. --- George Santayana (December 16, 1863 – September 26, 1952) Those who fail to clear history are doomed to explain it. --- OriginalGriff (February 24, 1959 – ∞)
-
Dash my buttons! I've been using 7z for a long time and I use it for my important end-of-day backups. I recently tried experimenting with WinRar's command line offering, rar.exe. Using the same input folder and with maximum compression rar.exe compressed the input to about 247Mb. I then compared that to 7z's file which I do with normal compression; 7z's file is 78Mb. I only wanted to look at WinRar because 7z doesn't play nicely if I try and extract multiple archives at the same time. Under some circumstances, 7z locks up if I do. But really, 247Mb v 78Mb is a good endorsement for 7z. I can live with 7z's odd behaviour. The general caveat applies: you mileage might vary.
If there is one thing more dangerous than getting between a bear and her cubs it's getting between my wife and her chocolate.
One thing I would ask is... Is 7z making a solid archive, whilst you rar was making un-solid archive? I use rar over WinZip as I found rar with solid archive turned on makes a far smaller file than WinZip could. Also what size dictionaries were you using?
-
One thing I would ask is... Is 7z making a solid archive, whilst you rar was making un-solid archive? I use rar over WinZip as I found rar with solid archive turned on makes a far smaller file than WinZip could. Also what size dictionaries were you using?
That's interesting. I've not changed the dictionary sizes in either. I will see if there's a comparable setting in each and compare them and, if different, I'll repeat the test with them set the same. I think I might have seen a reference to the "solid archive" in the command line options. I'll also investigate that as well. Thanks for the pointers.
If there is one thing more dangerous than getting between a bear and her cubs it's getting between my wife and her chocolate.
-
Dash my buttons! I've been using 7z for a long time and I use it for my important end-of-day backups. I recently tried experimenting with WinRar's command line offering, rar.exe. Using the same input folder and with maximum compression rar.exe compressed the input to about 247Mb. I then compared that to 7z's file which I do with normal compression; 7z's file is 78Mb. I only wanted to look at WinRar because 7z doesn't play nicely if I try and extract multiple archives at the same time. Under some circumstances, 7z locks up if I do. But really, 247Mb v 78Mb is a good endorsement for 7z. I can live with 7z's odd behaviour. The general caveat applies: you mileage might vary.
If there is one thing more dangerous than getting between a bear and her cubs it's getting between my wife and her chocolate.
