Results 1 to 19 of 19

Thread: Which DOS archiver has strogest average compression rate?

  1. #1
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Moscow
    Posts
    239
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 3 Times in 1 Post
    Is there anything stronger than UHARC? I know rar, sbc, ace, cab, uhbc, jar, imp - all of them compress worse. Rk is just too slow. Anisochronous archiver is preferable.

  2. #2
    Member Surfer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    oren
    Posts
    203
    Thanks
    18
    Thanked 7 Times in 1 Post
    All of them are not DOS, they all is win32

  3. #3
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Moscow
    Posts
    239
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 3 Times in 1 Post
    They all are can run in DOS (i.e. they are not PE files) or they have latest DOS versions. Besides, there is ERI, but it seems to make arhives larger than UHARC.

  4. #4
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Moscow
    Posts
    239
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 3 Times in 1 Post
    To be more precise it doesn't matter which OS is used to make arhives, but there must be working unpacker/SFX for DOS.

  5. #5
    Member Vacon's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    523
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Hello everyone,

    Quote Originally Posted by Surfer
    All of them are not DOS, they all is win32
    Are you sure...?
    At least for some (most?) of them are pure DOS-versions avaible.
    http://www.maximumcompression.com/programs.php could be a good start to find one.
    ftp://ftp.elf.stuba.sk/pub/pc/pack/ is a FTP - server with good and old archivers. Have a look at it.

    Best regards!

  6. #6
    Member Vacon's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    523
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Hello everyone,

    www.sqx-archiver.org
    from "description":
    Quote Originally Posted by SQX-Archiver
    ...SFX modules for DOS (32bit PMode), Win32 and x64. All SFX modules support multi-volume archives...
    Maybe useful?

    Best regards!

  7. #7
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    51
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by nimdamsk
    Is there anything stronger than UHARC? I know rar, sbc, ace, cab, uhbc, jar, imp - all of them compress worse. Rk is just too slow. Anisochronous archiver is preferable.
    LPAQ5 is in my opinion better. It is nost as fast as UHARC but better in compression.
    LPAQ5 is opensource and for both compression and speed it exceed RK.
    It works in a dos shell, and can even get the source code and compile it (with djgpp or mingw-gcc or any other compliler).

    http://cs.fit.edu/~mmahoney/compression/
    http://www.geocities.com/lovepimple_mail/

  8. #8
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    France
    Posts
    95
    Thanks
    13
    Thanked 72 Times in 42 Posts
    Hi,

    With HX DOS Extender, you can run any Win32 console application in DOS.


    AiZ

  9. #9
    Member Vacon's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    523
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Hello everyone,

    AiZ is right. And there is a version of 7-zip that runs under pure DOS too (port from p7zip) without HX:
    http://blairdude.googlepages.com/p7zip
    allthough kind of outdated...

    Best regards!

  10. #10
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Moscow
    Posts
    239
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 3 Times in 1 Post
    Thanks to all for suggestions. Seems Uharc is the best true Dos archiver. But there is FreeArc and CCM and i'll try to launch them using HX DOS Extender. It will be best solution i think.

  11. #11
    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 nimdamsk
    Thanks to all for suggestions. Seems Uharc is the best true Dos archiver. But there is FreeArc and CCM and ill try to launch them using HX DOS Extender. It will be best solution i think.
    you can try to compile everything for dos extender, including even PAQ

  12. #12
    Expert
    Matt Mahoney's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Melbourne, Florida, USA
    Posts
    3,255
    Thanks
    306
    Thanked 778 Times in 485 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Bulat Ziganshin
    ou can try to compile everything for dos extender, including even PAQ
    If you have 32 bit integers and 32 bit array indexes for arrays with hundreds of MB of memory and compile with -DNOASM (slow). Who uses DOS anymore?

  13. #13
    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 Matt Mahoney
    -DNOASM (slow).
    why no asm? dos extenders runs programs in 386 protected mode

  14. #14
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Moscow
    Posts
    239
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 3 Times in 1 Post
    Dos is useful in making boot cd. There are Live CD with Linux or Windows, but Dos based boot cd is loading much faster. There is Hiren's BootCD which uses Uharc, i want to optimise it just for fun

  15. #15
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Moscow
    Posts
    239
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 3 Times in 1 Post
    That is why i need anisochronous archiver, ccm is the slowest program i accept for speed reasons.

  16. #16
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    611
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
    if you're going to use HX, then try 7za, quad, uharc (ALZ method), GRZip, or sbc (all of them should be able to compete with uharc with assymetric setting at least up to some point IMHO). Symmetric YBS is also quite fast (~3x faster than CCM) and it has already executable for dos

  17. #17
    Expert
    Matt Mahoney's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Melbourne, Florida, USA
    Posts
    3,255
    Thanks
    306
    Thanked 778 Times in 485 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Bulat Ziganshin
    Quoting: Matt Mahoney
    -DNOASM (slow).


    why no asm? dos extenders runs programs in 386 protected mode
    I suppose it could work then. But the assembler would definitely not work in 16 bit real mode.

  18. #18
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    2
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Paq8o8 --- Takes a massive lead in maximumcompression.com - has source so you can compile in dos mode if you want

  19. #19
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    611
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
    nimdamsk is looking for something faster and more asymmetric, see his first post

Similar Threads

  1. paq8f w/ .DXEs (DJGPPv2, DOS, benchmarking)
    By Rugxulo in forum Data Compression
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 2nd February 2010, 15:32

Posting Permissions

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