|File compression compared
|Page 1 of 1|
|Author:||Pilot_51 [ Sat Oct 06, 2007 3:35 am ]|
|Post subject:||File compression compared|
I randomly decided to compare all the compression formats and methods and all the other technical stuff that 7-Zip supports compressing into, as well as the Windows Compressed Folder. Keep in mind that while 7-Zip doesn't support compressing into any other formats than the ones I compared with, it does support decompression of 15 formats "out of the box" and supports plugins to add support for more formats.
The files used in this test were the files that I distribute with my Stunting Grounds map, same as v0.31 but with minor changes to two of the text files.
Here's what each part of each line stands for in most of the lines: bytes, compression level, compression method, dictionary size, word size, and format. For the last one, solid means that all the files are compressed as a single string, which increases compression slightly but doesn't support modifying the files. The names in the list are, for the most part, the names that I used for the files during testing.
I couldn't go to the max word size for PPMd compression, which is 1536MB (which takes 1567MB to compress), because it said it couldn't allocate enough memory even though I had 2GB free of the 3GB that XP 32bit recognizes.
Here are my results, ordered from least compression to most compression, with the exception of the original size at top.
Since there are a couple formats that only support single file compression, I decided to test that too. I used Stunting_Grounds.rfa.
The lines are in the same format as above but with the prefix sf (single file).
|Page 1 of 1||All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]|
|Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group