Hello,
I will not test it, but you can do:
I noticed the dual cpu in your config and the double improvement of the speed. So the double of speed is not because of your cpu is dual core? Maybe 7-zip can use them while winrar can’t? Of course for you the result is okay, but the statement “7-zip speed doubled” is not true in this case.
So… what will we argue about in this era of 7-Zip Glasnost? Back to WinMerge vs. BeyondCompare?
No need to, Araxis Merge handily beats both by a far margin
most of the files of the daily backup have never changed during the month.
7-zip compresses a directory structure of around 9 GB to 80 MB where other utilities need around 2 GB !!
This may be because 7-zip uses “solid” archives by default when compressing to 7z. Basically all the files are considered as a single stream, so redundancies between different files can be compressed instead of being limited to redundancies of a single file. This of course has a fairly huge drawback: you have to decompress the whole archive every time you want to retrieve something, even if you only want a single file.
It is possible to activate it for Winrar.
I noticed the dual cpu in your config and the double improvement of the speed. So the double of speed is not because of your cpu is dual core? Maybe 7-zip can use them while winrar can’t?
His point is mostly that 7z 4.44 is twice as fast as 7z 4.40 (and thus becomes a time-worty alternative to Winrar). The question would be: if 7z 4.44 uses both cores, did 7z 4.40 do it? Plus I’m pretty sure Winrar’s been multithreaded since 3.60, so the comparison between 7z 4.44 and Winrar 3.70 seems fair
Jeff, could you also post the core load charts when compressing with Winrar, 7z 4.40 and 7z 4.44? Process Explorer’s System Information view for example.
I made a commitment to spend at least $20 per month supporting my
fellow independent software developers. WinRAR has become increasingly
essential to my toolkit over the last year, so this month, I’m buying
a WinRAR license.
I’m curious, are you now also considering to donate $20 to Igor Pavlov (7-zip developer)?
I’ve been drooling over the 150GB raptor for a while, but apparently my SATA controller on my motherboard is too old to correctly support it. It took me a while to figure that out, but it definitely earned a big WTF. You’d think SATA is SATA.
Shell integration in 7zip is nice, but it lacks the WinRAR-ian
’Extract to ThisDirectory`basename $1 .rar`’ option
It’s there but no longer appears to be enabled by default for some reason. I spent a while wondering what had become of this obvious feature. You have to hunt a bit to turn it on: start the 7zip file manager then tools-options-plugins-7zip-options-system-context menu items
I use “extractnow”… its simple, and clean, and it does things in batch natively. Its very customizable.
double click on any archive file, and “pop”, the archive is extracted.
for compression, I use 7zip, cus its free, fast, and good compression ratio and the command line nature means i can make batch files with it really cleanly. If I’m compressing something, its purely to save diskspace, so i want the greatest compression possible. And since i typcically schedual compressions with a chron job, the time it takes isn’t that important to me.
tar.gz for the win!
Shell integration in 7zip is nice, but it lacks the WinRAR-ian ‘Extract to ThisDirectory`basename $1 .rar`’ option, so you have to load up the UI if you want to guarantee everything from the rar go into a directory. Otherwise you end up with files strewn about in the current directory.
Have you ever heard of the product called Izarc?
* Create an archive
* Add files to an existing archive
* Delete files from an existing archive
* Extract files from an existing archive
* Test an archive file
* Convert archive
* Convert CD Images
* Repair broken archive
* Searching for any files in many archives
* Favorite Folders
* Obtaining a detailed list of files and information like compression rate, path, or size from an archive file
* Supports both long and short 8.3 filenames
* Disk spanning from and to multiple diskettes or other removable media
* Implementing the possibility to sort the list items by name size, date and etc.
* Full Drag Drop support
* CD/DVD Images support (ISO, BIN, MDF, NRG, IMG, C2D, PDI, CDI)
* Integrating in Windows Explorer context menu
* Automatic installation of most software distributed in archive files
* Add/View comments in an archive
* By double-clicking onto a file in the file list, it's opened with the program associated to this file type
* CheckOut feature
* Create a self-extracting archive
* E-mail an archive
* Checking for new updates
* Build-in multilanguage support
* Virus Scan feature
* UU/XX/MIME Encode/Decode
* Create Multi-Volume Set
* Merge Multi-Volume Set
* UnSFX (Convert self-extracting (SFX) .EXE files to standard archives)
* Encrypt files using Rijandael - AES (256-bits) encryption
* Zip encryption (WinZip 9 compatible)
* BZip compression for ZIP archives
* Decrypt (.ize) files
I personally like it because it can handle all the zip, rar files i may work with, and the interface is easy to learn, and doesn’t try to get in the way, as does winzip.
It’s very customizable, just a quality freeware product, in my own humble opinion.
You’d think someone wouldn’t want to intentionally name a program something that’s only going to get confused for the venerable lzarc (still the most popular archive format in japan).
you wont fool me with your little tests, your going to have to prove this to me.
One thing I like about 7-ZIP is that you can get it as a portable app. One place I have found it is at www.portableapps.com
Matt had mentioned the explorer shell for 7-zip, so I won’t repeat that.
Johnny Guitar asked if 7-zip support ACL. From the man 7z page of the p7zip-full package for Ubuntu:
“”"
DO NOT USE the 7-zip format for backup purpose on Linux/Unix because :
On Linux/Unix, in order to backup directories you must use tar :
I guess this ain’t ACL you asked though.
I’m actually quite frustrated with 7-zip right now. I find its compression is very hit-or-miss. I started converting all my archives to 7-zip and I’d say about 30% of the time the 7z archive is larger than the RAR it’s trying to replace, and this is with the uber-slow Ultra algorithm and 96m dictionary (it eats up about 1.1gb of memory during compression). Spread over a few dozen files totaling about 15 gb of data, it ends up being that most of the 7z files are 10-15% smaller than their RAR equivalents, but a few weirdos end up being significantly larger, negating the savings of the smaller files. In most of these bizarre cases 7-zip performs worse than even plain old ZIP. Seems like a bug to me, like the 7-zip compressor is choosing the wrong strategy for certain data streams, much like early versions of RAR sometimes resulted in archives larger than the input source data.
For that reason, I’ve stopped doing these mass conversions for the time being as I simply don’t have the time to cross-compare different archive formats, nor do I want a heterogeneous mix in my backup.
7-Zip Version 4.46 beta 2007-05-25
7zip sucks totally since you can not extract something on external files when there is no space for the TOTAL extracted archive on C:\
How bad is that: It extracts to C: and move it later.
7-zip(ver.4.42)'s “Maximum” compression mode seems to produde a slightly smaller file than WinRAR ‘best’ mode does. But, it uses 200MB of physical memory during archinving in addition to long time. So sometimes background archiving was not practical in my 1GB ram system.
I always use 7-zip. However, some disadvantages like no recovery record, incomplete multi volume, still slow time, lack of drag and drop archiving should be covered, I think.
Unless I’m being dumb, unlike Winrar, 7z cannot cope with broken files - If one has the first part of a series of Winrar split files one can at least get the first part to extract its files. With 7z it seems (like Winzip) one must waiut until ALL the segments are downloaded. This sucks. Stick with Winrar for this reason. Or am I being stupid?
WinRAR ownz windows… 7zip is for warez kiddies; I think they even know better Ive test 7zip vs. WinRar in VM, VB’s on both xp vista windows 7 - the result is always the same for large or small archives, WinRAR might not hit the compression ratio each time, but for performance and speed and easy use, I’ll easly give up 1-2% compression ratio.
Tested on Vista 32/64x, WinXP/64x on a QX6700 4GB RAM, VM 2 Proc’s 1GB ram, fresh install of both.
no need to post each result as it’s most conclusive, nor do I care, someone del this
Use linux! Ubuntu has 100% more development and support than windows. and it’s free!
Peace.
-Ng
I knew it had sped up, but not that much. Nice to see your results.
So… what will we argue about in this era of 7-Zip Glasnost? Back to WinMerge vs. BeyondCompare?