Page 3 of 8 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 90 of 226

Thread: MONSTER OF COMPRESSION - New Benchmark

  1. #61
    Tester
    Nania Francesco's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Italy
    Posts
    1,565
    Thanks
    220
    Thanked 146 Times in 83 Posts

    Thanks for Help!

    Thanks endless for the help, if someone wants to signal me some compressor that are escaped me now thanks him/it since! Hi!

  2. #62
    Programmer osmanturan's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Mersin, Turkiye
    Posts
    651
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    @nania:
    First of all, you should leave TARred benchmark. This is unfair for statistical compressors and file extension based compressors (like FreeArc). AFAIK, MOC is started for finding best practical compressor. I don't use TAR before any compressor program for daily purposes. I think, most of people's habits like mine. I think, TARred benchmark only benefits for a compressor which have a large LZ dictionary and non-solid compressing capability.

    @the others:
    I think, CCM(x) surely use a LZ like submodel for dealing with highly redundant data. This also benefits for high speed compression. When LZ submodel is active, all other sub models seem inactive. Notice that, RZM seems slower and worser (I know RZM has almost no-filters. But, this comparasion is fair for me)

  3. #63
    Member Fallon's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Europe - The Netherlands
    Posts
    154
    Thanks
    14
    Thanked 10 Times in 5 Posts

    Thumbs up

    Quote Originally Posted by Nania Francesco View Post
    5 (FIVE) RANKS

    1- COMPRESSIONE SIZE (MONSTER OF COMPRESSION)
    2- DECOMPRESSION EFFICIENCY (KING OF COMPRESSION)
    3- COMPRESSION EFFICIENCY
    4- COMPRESSION TIME
    5- DECOMPRESSION TIME
    Hi Francesco!
    If you like, a suggestion to complete your 5 (five) MOC ranks.

    1- COMPRESSION SIZE (MONSTER OF COMPRESSION)
    2- DECOMPRESSION EFFICIENCY (KING OF COMPRESSION)
    3- COMPRESSION EFFICIENCY (champion of compression)
    4- COMPRESSION TIME (rocket of compression)
    5- DECOMPRESSION TIME (the ripper of compression)

    Of course other names are possible too.
    Love the theme of your site!

  4. #64
    Tester
    Nania Francesco's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Italy
    Posts
    1,565
    Thanks
    220
    Thanked 146 Times in 83 Posts

    New MOC Update!

    06.07.2008

    Added NanoZip
    Added PPMD (re-tested)
    Added Winzip 11.2
    Added Squeez 5.61
    Added Blizzard 0,24B
    Updated Balz 1.14

    Link:
    http://www.winturtle.netsons.org/MOC/MOC.htm

  5. #65
    Programmer
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Finland
    Posts
    102
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
    Thanks a lot for testing Nania. I regret nz_optimum2 (-cO) is not tested, as I think it might be very efficient in your test because the decompression time is measured.

  6. #66
    Tester
    Nania Francesco's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Italy
    Posts
    1,565
    Thanks
    220
    Thanked 146 Times in 83 Posts

    Hi Sami!

    nz_optimum2 (-cO) tested in the next release! NanoZip is The Best compressor of the world for me!

  7. #67
    The Founder encode's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Moscow, Russia
    Posts
    3,954
    Thanks
    359
    Thanked 332 Times in 131 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Nania Francesco View Post
    06.07.2008

    Added NanoZip
    Added PPMD (re-tested)
    Added Winzip 11.2
    Added Squeez 5.61
    Added Blizzard 0,24B
    Updated Balz 1.14

    Link:
    http://www.winturtle.netsons.org/MOC/MOC.htm
    Thank you!
    Note that BALZ v1.14 use just ~67 MB, for both compression and decompression!

  8. #68
    Programmer
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    420
    Thanks
    28
    Thanked 150 Times in 18 Posts
    Thank you for the update, Francesco!

    Over the 'delightful' discussion with Sami I almost forgot to say thanks. Nonetheless, congrats to Sami for all the set records.

  9. #69
    Programmer
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Finland
    Posts
    102
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Christian View Post
    Thank you for the update, Francesco!

    Over the 'delightful' discussion with Sami I almost forgot to say thanks. Nonetheless, congrats to Sami for all the set records.
    Thanks again Chris. I'm eagerly waiting for the optimum2 test still, to see how it performs on the decompression efficiency.

  10. #70
    Member Zonder's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Home
    Posts
    55
    Thanks
    20
    Thanked 6 Times in 5 Posts
    Hi Nania, why WinRK rolz3-fastest so slow on MOC?

    on MFC and my tests WinRK is about 2-3x faster than in your tests...

  11. #71
    Tester
    Nania Francesco's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Italy
    Posts
    1,565
    Thanks
    220
    Thanked 146 Times in 83 Posts

    HI!

    @ Zonder , Hi!
    I have made a will WinRK v.3.03 type of compression version nr.2 in the option fast, can sincerely tell you that almost all the programs of compression that use an arithmetic algorithm (ppmd,turtle,ccm.... and also winrk) in some types of file BIN (30 MB),MP3 (30 MB),WMA (30 MB),AVI (35 MB),WAVE (40MB),VOB (64 MB) etc....... you/they have slow down a lot the compression, not only but I have also noticed that those that use the system of search ROLZ, hardly a lot in these compressible files!

  12. #72
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    115
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by osmanturan View Post
    @nania:
    First of all, you should leave TARred benchmark. This is unfair for statistical compressors and file extension based compressors (like FreeArc). AFAIK, MOC is started for finding best practical compressor. I don't use TAR before any compressor program for daily purposes. I think, most of people's habits like mine.
    I agree with this! Nania, can you tell us why do you use a TARred benchmark? It's simpler for you? Or it's more fair in your opinion?

  13. #73
    Tester
    Nania Francesco's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Italy
    Posts
    1,565
    Thanks
    220
    Thanked 146 Times in 83 Posts

    For description!

    Unfortunately the translator from English to Italian doesn't allow me to understand at times well thing are asking me! Only a question but does someone perhaps believe that the benchmark MOC is based on an only file TAR? Because it deals with 765.008.542 byte 170 files in 30 folders!
    Last edited by Nania Francesco; 9th July 2008 at 17:42.

  14. #74
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    115
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Nania Francesco View Post
    Unfortunately the translator dall' English to Italian doesn't allow me to understand at times well thing are asking me! Only a question but does someone perhaps believe that the benchmark MOC is based on an only file TAR? Because it deals with 765.008.542 byte 170 files in 30 folders!
    OK. In MaximumCompression benchmark, single file compressors tested with TAR, and multiple file compressors are tested without TAR (on files themselves).Thus TAR only used if needed. On MOC TAR is always used. FreeArc compresses TAR worse than files from TAR. Can you please unTAR testset and test FreeArc on files? I mean testset without TAR. Thanks.

  15. #75
    Programmer Bulat Ziganshin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Uzbekistan
    Posts
    4,497
    Thanks
    733
    Thanked 659 Times in 354 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Nania Francesco View Post
    Unfortunately the translator from English to Italian doesn't allow me to understand at times well thing are asking me! Only a question but does someone perhaps believe that the benchmark MOC is based on an only file TAR? Because it deals with 765.008.542 byte 170 files in 30 folders!
    sorry, but i can't believe you. fa 0.40 results was symmetric that proves that all files was compressed with ppmd algorithm. but fa 0.40 don't compress avi, jpg and other compressed files with ppmd. please show us the log of processing these data with fa 0.40

  16. #76
    Tester
    Nania Francesco's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Italy
    Posts
    1,565
    Thanks
    220
    Thanked 146 Times in 83 Posts

    Arc source code of program used for testing!

    ; MOC ARC TEST - SOURCE CODE -> IN PUREBASIC ;
    InitKeyboard()
    InitSprite()
    Global Dim Path$(328000)
    Global Dim nfile$(328000)
    Global nufile,ndia,ndit
    nudi:
    ndit=1:ndia=1
    inipath.s = Space(1000)
    GetCurrentDirectory_(1000,@inipath)
    Path$(ndia) = PathRequester("Please choose Source path", inipath)
    ruspu2=Len(Path$(1))+1
    For spu2=Len(Path$(1))-1 To 1 Step -1
    If Mid(Path$(ndia),spu2,1)="\" : oldpath$=Mid(Path$(ndia),spu2+1,Len(Path$(ndia))-spu2):Goto lembo:EndIf
    Next
    lembo:
    mepo:
    nudivo=0
    If ndia>ndit:Goto mepo2:EndIf
    ExamineDirectory(0,Path$(ndia), "*.*")
    lopas:
    FileType = NextDirectoryEntry(0)
    If Filetype>0 And DirectoryEntryType(0) = #PB_DirectoryEntry_File
    nudivo+1
    FileName$ = DirectoryEntryName(0)
    If ReadFile(0,Path$(ndia)+FileName$)
    nufile=nufile+1
    nomef$=oldpath$+Mid(Path$(ndia),ruspu2,Len(Path$(n dia))-ruspu2+1)+FileName$
    nfile$(nufile)=Path$(ndia)+FileName$
    CloseFile(0)
    EndIf
    EndIf
    If Filetype>0 And DirectoryEntryType(0)=#PB_DirectoryEntry_Directory
    If DirectoryEntryName(0)<>"." And DirectoryEntryName(0)<>".." :ndit+1:Path$(ndit)=Path$(ndia)+DirectoryEntryName (0)+"\":EndIf
    EndIf
    If Filetype>0
    Goto lopas
    Else
    ndia+1:Goto mepo
    EndIf
    mepo2:
    If ReadFile(0,"c:\t.zip"):CloseFile(0) : DeleteFile("c:\t.zip"):EndIf
    OpenWindow(0, 0, 0, 800, 1600, "IPER SQEEZE",#PB_Window_SystemMenu)
    StartDrawing(WindowOutput(0))
    For i=1 To nufile
    DrawText(0,20+i*15," nome="+nfile$(i))
    WindowEvent()
    starti = GetTickCount_()
    para$=" a -m6 "+" t.zip "+nfile$(i)
    exe$="arc.exe"
    result = RunProgram(exe$,para$,"c:\",#PB_Program_Wait| #PB_Program_Hide)
    startf = GetTickCount_()
    timenc=timenc+(startf-starti)
    If ReadFile(0,nfile$(i)):lufa1=Lof(0):mefile =AllocateMemory(lufa1):ReadData(0,mefile,lufa1):Cl oseFile(0):EndIf
    starti = GetTickCount_()
    para1$=" e "+" t.zip"
    exe1$="arc.exe"
    result = RunProgram(exe1$,para1$,"c:\",#PB_Program_Wait| #PB_Program_Hide)
    startf = GetTickCount_()
    timdec=timdec+(startf-starti)
    If ReadFile(0,"c:\"+GetFilePart(nfile$(i))):lufa2=Lof (0):mefile2 =AllocateMemory(lufa2):ReadData(0,mefile2,lufa2):C loseFile(0):EndIf
    If CompareMemory(mefile,mefile2,lufa1)=0:MessageReque ster("Information"," TEST FAILED COMP/DEC !", 0):End:EndIf
    FreeMemory(mefile)
    FreeMemory(mefile2)
    If (timenc/1000>1800) MessageRequester("Information"," TEST FAILED INT TIME LIMIT!", 0):End:EndIf
    If ReadFile(0,nfile$(i)):lufi=Lof(0):total+lufi:Close File(0):EndIf
    If ReadFile(0,"c:\t.zip"):lufi=Lof(0):lufi2+lufi:Clos eFile(0) : DeleteFile("c:\t.zip"):EndIf
    Testo$=exe1$+para1$+"name="+nfile$(i)+" "+Str(lufa1)+"->"+Str(lufi)+" "+Chr(13)+Chr(10)
    If OpenFile(0,"c:\statistica.txt"):FileSeek(0,Lof(0)) :WriteString(0,Testo$):CloseFile(0):EndIf
    If ReadFile(0,"c:\"+GetFilePart(nfile$(i))):CloseFile (0) : DeleteFile("c:\"+GetFilePart(nfile$(i))):EndIf
    DrawText(0,20+i*15," nome="+nfile$(i)+" result="+Str(lufi)+" ")
    Next

    DrawText(0,20,"numero file="+Str(nufile)+" total="+Str(total)+" compr="+Str(lufi2)+" TIME="+Str(timenc)+" ",0)
    Testo$="number of files="+Str(nufile)+" original="+Str(total)+" compressed="+Str(lufi2)+" ENC="+StrF(timenc/1000)+" sec. DEC="+StrF(timdec/1000)+" sec."+Chr(13)+Chr(10)
    If OpenFile(0,"c:\statistica.txt"):FileSeek(0,Lof(0)) :WriteString(0,Testo$):CloseFile(0):EndIf
    MessageRequester("TEST COMPLETED!","num files="+Str(nufile)+" tot="+Str(total)+" C="+Str(lufi2)+" ENC="+Str(timenc)+" DEC="+Str(timdec), 0)
    End
    ; P.S. Place Arc.exe in c:\
    Last edited by Nania Francesco; 9th July 2008 at 18:56.

  17. #77
    Tester
    Nania Francesco's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Italy
    Posts
    1,565
    Thanks
    220
    Thanked 146 Times in 83 Posts

    I would appreciate some excuses !

    Also try you bulat my program of test and I believe that being automatic nothing is tied up to my intervention!!!! Hi!

  18. #78
    Programmer Bulat Ziganshin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Uzbekistan
    Posts
    4,497
    Thanks
    733
    Thanked 659 Times in 354 Posts
    1. arc.groups should be put in the same directory as arc.exe. well, i think that archiver tester should be able at least to read english docs which describes installation procedure

    2. this script compress each file into separate archive

    overall, i think that MOC is the most meaningless test i ever seen

  19. #79
    Programmer Bulat Ziganshin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Uzbekistan
    Posts
    4,497
    Thanks
    733
    Thanked 659 Times in 354 Posts
    Nania, i use ruby script for automatic archiver testing. this script is included in freearc distribution, but i don't think that your test with such script will be better. using nonsolid compression is so obvious mistake that i can't trust your tests

  20. #80
    Tester
    Nania Francesco's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Italy
    Posts
    1,565
    Thanks
    220
    Thanked 146 Times in 83 Posts
    I am interested to make a will everything, tell me Bulat as can make a will with a solo I command in formed "solid" all the folders of MOC and the files with arc.exe and me I will do him/it if is more powerful person in compression!

  21. #81
    Programmer Bulat Ziganshin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Uzbekistan
    Posts
    4,497
    Thanks
    733
    Thanked 659 Times in 354 Posts
    such questions should be asked before making test. if you don't know how to use archivers - don't make a "test"

    Nania, your compression algorithms are great, but this test is below any critique

  22. #82
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Antwerp , country:Belgium , W.Europe
    Posts
    487
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked 3 Times in 3 Posts
    @ Nania
    I have to agree with Bulat on this...
    Why don't you make a simple test like
    Code:
    timer arc a -mx -r archive .\testfiles\*
    and
    timer arc t archive.arc
    You don't need a script to do this, do you ?

    Jest test this and let us know the timings and ratio's.

  23. #83
    Programmer Bulat Ziganshin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Uzbekistan
    Posts
    4,497
    Thanks
    733
    Thanked 659 Times in 354 Posts
    the comparison should AUITOMATICALLY test HUNDREDS of programs/modes. one commandline for handful testing of one freearc mode cannot solve problem - tester himself should know how to run various archivers, how to measure speed and so on. Nania's test is just source of confusion - noone knows what he really test

  24. #84
    Tester
    Nania Francesco's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Italy
    Posts
    1,565
    Thanks
    220
    Thanked 146 Times in 83 Posts

    FREEARC 0.50 IN TESTING

    AT MOMENT FREEARC IS IN TESTING..... [SOLID] GREAT COMPRESSION !

  25. #85
    Tester
    Nania Francesco's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Italy
    Posts
    1,565
    Thanks
    220
    Thanked 146 Times in 83 Posts

    New MOC Update!

    UPDATED FreeARC 0.50 Solid [option -r ] - m1, m3,m5,mx

  26. #86
    Programmer Bulat Ziganshin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Uzbekistan
    Posts
    4,497
    Thanks
    733
    Thanked 659 Times in 354 Posts
    i think that freearc -m2 may be "most efficient compressor" in your rating

    but actually i wonder how many compressors was tested in the same fashion, in particular, it seems that all one-file compressors are tested in non-tar mode
    Last edited by Bulat Ziganshin; 10th July 2008 at 00:42.

  27. #87
    Tester
    Nania Francesco's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Italy
    Posts
    1,565
    Thanks
    220
    Thanked 146 Times in 83 Posts

    Help Bulat!

    Please write the best options for you in console mode !
    Tar active ....?
    Detection file level....?
    Multimedia compression....?
    P.S. More compressor as tested in NON-TAR-MODE!
    Tar mode is for RAR - 7ZIP -FREEARC -WINTURLE - SQUEEZ -DCGA
    Last edited by Nania Francesco; 10th July 2008 at 00:55.

  28. #88
    Programmer Bulat Ziganshin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Uzbekistan
    Posts
    4,497
    Thanks
    733
    Thanked 659 Times in 354 Posts
    best modes are -m1..-m5 and -mx

  29. #89
    Tester
    Nania Francesco's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Italy
    Posts
    1,565
    Thanks
    220
    Thanked 146 Times in 83 Posts

    Excuse me, new Help

    I want to know if I have to for instance add also other commands

    Arc -r - mx -ma2 -mm=on archive sourcefile

    or if it is enough only

    arc -mx -r archive sourcefile

  30. #90
    Programmer Bulat Ziganshin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Uzbekistan
    Posts
    4,497
    Thanks
    733
    Thanked 659 Times in 354 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Nania Francesco View Post
    P.S. More compressor as tested in NON-TAR-MODE!
    Tar mode is for RAR - 7ZIP -FREEARC -WINTURLE - SQUEEZ -DCGA
    if you mean "most compressors" - this makes test absolutely useless

Page 3 of 8 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. HFCB: Huge Files Compression Benchmark
    By Bulat Ziganshin in forum Data Compression
    Replies: 129
    Last Post: 6th January 2015, 15:31
  2. New benchmark for generic compression
    By Matt Mahoney in forum Data Compression
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 29th December 2008, 09:20
  3. MONSTER OF COMPRESSION - New Benchmark -
    By Nania Francesco in forum Forum Archive
    Replies: 222
    Last Post: 5th May 2008, 10:04
  4. Compression speed benchmark
    By Sportman in forum Forum Archive
    Replies: 104
    Last Post: 23rd April 2008, 16:38
  5. Synthetic compression benchmark
    By giorgiotani in forum Forum Archive
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 3rd March 2008, 12:14

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •