Compression Comparison Guide Rev. 2.0
There are many others as you can see on this table.
As you can see, the data compression software that was used to test are a selection of old stalwarts, as well as current popular formats. But instead of just testing them at the default settings, we are going to examine each data compressor at their fastest and best compression settings as well
Here are the data sets that were used in this test.
To obtain an accurate idea of how well each compressor will perform in real world, we have specially created a data compression benchmark. The fileset consists of 10 standard categories covering all the common file types as well as a special category. All categories have a size of at least 200,000,000 bytes. compressed by nature (e.g. MP3, MPEG, JPEG, etc.), we have only one thing to say - when you assume, you make an ass out of u and me. As you will see later, the results of some of the newer compressors will surprise you. They can attain really amazing compression results even with files that are thought to be impossibly hard to compress. We wouldn't have discovered that if we did not test and merely assumed, would we?
Overall, WinRK was the champion at compressing the filesets. It had an average compression rate of 23.2%. It was 9% better at overall compression than its closest rival, SBC Archiver which had an average compression rate of 21.3%. The poorest compressors overall, at default settings, were the trio of WinZip, gzip and ARJ32. They only had average compression rates of about 13%.
However, gzip was the undisputed speed champion. It only took just over 121 seconds to completely process the complete fileset collection which weighed in at over 1.6GB. It was over a third faster than the runner-ups, ARJ32 and WinZip.
The other compressors were pretty slow at their normal compression settings. However, WinRK was extremely slow, compared to the others. It took almost 1.5 hours to compress the entire fileset collection
The compression efficiency rating is a simple way to evaluate the efficiency of each data compressor. This way, we can see which compressor can save the most space in the least time.
Please note that a higher efficiency rating does not mean the compressor is better. It just means the compressor has a better compression-to-speed ratio. A more efficient compressor is, of course, always more desirable than a less efficient one.
The most efficient data compressor for the aggregated results was gzip. Its super-fast compression speed, coupled with its average compression rate allowed it to become the undisputed overall efficiency champion. ARJ32 and WinZip were also very efficient compressors. They were more than twice as efficient as their nearest rivals, StuffIt and bzip2.
The other compressors may have been good at certain files, but overall, they were pretty inefficient. The most inefficient compressors overall was WinRK by a large margin . No matter how good it was at compressing files, its extremely slow compression speed totally killed its efficiency ratings.
Here is the conclusion from the Article:
WinRK was the best compressor in most filesets it encountered. So, it was not surprising that it was the overall compression champion. However, its performance was offset by its abysmally slow performance. Even with a really fast system, it still took ages to compress the filesets. On several occasions, it took more than 18 minutes to compress just 200MB of files. Thanks to this flaw, it had the dubious honour of being the most inefficient compressor as well.
SBC Archiver, which was just slightly poorer than WinRK at compression was much faster at the job. Although it was nowhere near the top of the speed rankings, its faster speed allowed it to attain a moderate efficiency ranking.
WinRAR, which is a favourite of many Internet users, displayed a surprisingly bland performance at default settings. Although it had a pretty good overall compression rate of just under 19%, it was very slow at its default settings. That made it the third most-inefficient compressor. Surprising, isn't it?
In contrast, another perennial favourite, WinZip which had a lower overall compression rate of 13% managed to attain a much higher efficiency rating because it was able to compress the filesets much faster than WinRAR. Quite surprising since many users have abandoned it for WinRAR in view of its rather dated compression algorithm.
StuffIt is a dark horse. It has a pretty good compression rate overall but with an unimpressive compression speed. However, its amazing performance with JPEG files cannot be denied. JPEG files is undeniably StuffIt's forte. No other compressor even comes within a light year of it.
gzip and ARJ32 are both the fastest and the worst compressors of the lot. They have unimpressive overall compression rates but more than make up for it with their tremendous compression speeds. Therefore, it isn't surprising to see them garner the top two spots in compressor efficiency. However, we would still recommend GUI alternatives like WinZip. It is almost as efficient as gzip and ARJ32 and far more user-friendly.
Based on our results, we can only come to one conclusion. If you do not like to change the settings of your data compressors and want a good, fast and user-friendly data compressor, then WinZip is the best one for the job.
What is your opinion?
