BEST Compression Software ?

[AvinashR]

Hi Guys,

Can you please tell me which is the best compression software? At present I am using 7Zip but it does not fulfill my needs. I want to compress my malware samples at a very extreme rate and without getting them corrupted. I generally exchange samples with many malware hunters and in order to save my bandwidth, I need a good compression software which can compress 1 GB of files into 200 or 300 MB ...

Any help/suggestion will be highly appreciated ..

Cheers,

[AvinashR]

I have heard about PAQ8 Compression software... Does anybody used it?

[Bambo]

Install PeaZip http://www.peazip.org/index.html and test Paq vs. FreeArc They are probably better than 7zip http://www.maximumcompression.com/data/summary_sf.php

If you don't like PeaZip FreeArc has gui and support for Paq (I think) http://freearc.org/Benchmarks.aspx 2-10% better than 7zip was about right when I tested it long time ago. I seem to remember that Paq was so slow I dropped any test. Arc being the only free and usable alternative.

WinRK is even better but not free, with gui though http://www.msoftware.biz/products/winrk#tabs-tabset-1

Think most of the others are command line stuff.

[AvinashR]

-{ Quote: "Install PeaZip http://www.peazip.org/index.html and test Paq vs. FreeArc They are probably better than 7zip http://www.maximumcompression.com/data/summary_sf.php

If you don't like PeaZip FreeArc has gui and support for Paq (I think) http://freearc.org/Benchmarks.aspx 2-10% better than 7zip was about right when I tested it long time ago. I seem to remember that Paq was so slow I dropped any test. Arc being the only free and usable alternative.

WinRK is even better but not free, with gui though http://www.msoftware.biz/products/winrk#tabs-tabset-1

Think most of the others are command line stuff." }-

Hi Bro,

You are right. PAQ is really really slow. I will try FreeArc.. I am already using PeaZip, but if I use PAQ compression method then it will take ages to compress my files :(

Any other suggestion?

[AvinashR]

Well I have used FreeArc too but its compressing files as same 7Zip utility... So it does not add any significance ... :(

ZAPQ and PAQ8 is very very very slow... So its NO NO for me ..

NOW what's left?

[zfactor]

have you tried winrar?

[majoMo]

-{ Quote: "I want to compress my malware samples at a very extreme rate" }-
Since many malware samples are packed/compacted, it's not easy to compress them too much. You can try KGB Archiver (http://kgbarchiver.net/) though. Or to use ArcConvert (http://archivconvert.sourceforge.net/) by Dirk Paehl to check several compressors performance.

[Sadeghi85]

Try winuha (http://klaimsoft.com/winuha/) or lprepaq (http://schnaader.info/precomp.php).

[Kernelwars]

Hi Avinash,
Did u try ALZip 7.0 beta 8)

[Bob D]

Efficacy depends on type of file as well as the compression program: http://www.maximumcompression.com/data/summary_sf.php
-{ Quote: "...PAQ8 is very very very slow..." }-You're not kidding. 7-zip: 92 seconds, PAQ8px: 23,427 seconds: http://www.maximumcompression.com/data/summary_mf3.php
Source: http://www.maximumcompression.com/index.html

[The Seeker]

Bought WinRAR five years ago, has been flawless for me. Lifetime license is well worth it.

[Kernelwars]

-{ Quote: "Bought WinRAR five years ago, has been flawless for me. Lifetime license is well worth it." }-
agreed :thumb:

[Noob]

What are the benefits of paid Winrar?
For me, i've always used the free version since i started using PC's :lurking:

[Bob D]

-{ Quote: "What are the benefits of paid Winrar?..." }-
I'm curious myself, in that free 7-zip offers almost the same compression ratio.

[Night_Raven]

-{ Quote: "I'm curious myself, in that free 7-zip offers almost the same compression ratio." }-
7-Zip's compression ratio is actually noticeably better than WinRAR's. 7-Zip is by far the best mainstream format with wide support in terms of compression ratios.
It's what I'd recomment to the OP.

[Bambo]

It is but he is not looking for mainstream but small files and with 1gb it can matter. Anyway I "zipped" up my Minefield folder. WinRK was best by far 9.37mb, UHA 10.45mb, 7z 10.94, Freearc 11.27, Std. Zip from Totalcommander 14.85mb which has been left behind due to 7zip updates I think. Was better than 7zip last I checked. Winrar is probably on 7zip level, try beta of new version 4. Imagine how much bandwidth could be saved if WinRK was std. and not zip. Say thanks to proprietary format and conservatism :) WinRK was last updated in 2008 so I bet he has sold off magic, how it goes. Be thankful for 7zip.

[Night_Raven]

If really every byte is cruicial then fine, but it's damn annoying for everyone who would receive such a file to have to install a specific program in order to extract it. That's where the format popularity comes in handy. 7-Zip offers the best popularity/compression ratio and is free.
In any case you can't compress a file beyond a certain point, no matter what the archiver is.

[Warlockz]

Huge Comparison Chart

http://www.maximumcompression.com/data/summary_mf2.php

[DOSawaits]

It's not that easy comparing compression software, nor is it logic science.
regarding efficiency (compression ratio/compression speed) PAQ and other rather unknown are a big NO, utterly unefficient.

7-Zip and WinRAR are among the best, but compressing images, one time 7-zip comes on top, doing another batch of images, WinRAR comes on top.

Idem dito for executables, there is no simple conclusion, but atm 7-Zip and WinRAR (and FreeARC) are on top of the pack overall.

[Noob]

I would say Winrar is more widely used than 7-Zip based on my experience though i feel both are the same. ;D

[AvinashR]

I guess WinRK is also using PAQ algorithm to compress files.. Not sure though.

[Kuru_54]

-{ Quote: "Can you please tell me which is the best compression software?" }-
Definition of best mainly depends on you needs, as for what I can see you are searching for maximum compression rate at reasonable speed, otherwise bandwith you save would not balance the extra computing time cost.

KGB archiver and WinRK uses modified old versions of PAQ, while PeaZip uses reasonably recent version of that algorithm.
PAQ is the champion in terms of compression, but in any case seems too slow for you.
ZPAQ is faster, but still out of the range of something useful for compressing many GB of data.
On maximumcompression.com you can find some other PAQ-like algorithms (and some different algorithms) on the top of the chart, but in all cases the speed is the big issue.

For many types of data applying such powerful compression may end in a very little advantage, so you should try some most common compression algorithm if you want to keep compression time reasonable.
Usually 7Z and ARC format compresses better than RAR, that compresses better than BZ2; any of that compress much more better than ZIP, which is faster.

In short my best guess to find the most effective way to compress your data is to play a little with 7Z format, using LZMA2 algorithm and testing some of the advanced compression options.

[Basic]

-{ Quote: "What are the benefits of paid Winrar?
For me, i've always used the free version since i started using PC's :lurking:" }-

Uhmm! Free version?:blink:

[CiX]

-{ Quote: "Uhmm! Free version?:blink:" }-

WinRAR is still functional after the 40 day trial (with program startup nag screen though)

[Noob]

Yep, completely functional, i call it kinda free because it continues working, i don't even know if they remove any features LOL ::)

Always been using it like that and it's all fine :lurking:

[Bambo]

-{ Quote: "Anyone may use this software during a test period of 40 days. Following this test period of 40 days or less, if you wish to continue to use WinRAR, you must purchase a license.
" }-

from Winrars license page does not mean free though.

If WinRK is used with best compression it take 28 minutes or something to compress my Minefield folder, down to 8.93mb but close to unusable. Definitely is for 1gb. High profile beating 7zip is about 4 minutes. I don't know how much sense it make to use a program which is not updated since 2008. If trial is like Winrars then may be, I would not pay for it.

I tried Winrar 4 beta4 at best comp, 11.95mb against 7zips 10.94 :) I do not have 7zip installed but used PeaZip, may be possible to tweak further via its own gui.

[Mr.PC]

WinRaR

Options>Settings>Compression>Create Default>Compression Method: Normal (default) change it to Best.

[Sadeghi85]

There is also Ultra7z Optimizer: http://www.ultra7z.ru/

But it's a bit slow, it gets your normal 7z(or rar, zip etc) file and compresses every file in it with all compression methods that 7zip supports and picks the best, the resulting file is fully compatible with 7zip.

[Bambo]

You forgot arrow pointing at "Create solid archive" Mr. PC - the more files the more important it can be http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solid_compression 7z does it as well :)

Tried LibreOffice which is 464mb.

7zip 102.887 kb, Winrar 121.150 kb - both solid

7zip 135.843 kb, Winrar 143.484 kb - both normal

[Basic]

-{ Quote: "WinRAR is still functional after the 40 day trial (with program startup nag screen though)" }-

Did not know this. I tried the product and liked it so supported it.

[The Seeker]

-{ Quote: "I tried the product and liked it so supported it." }-

Exactly why I bought WinRAR. Also, 7-Zip does not allow the adding of files to an existing archive.

[Boyfriend]

I am in favor of WinRAR with tweaked settings.

[Kuru_54]

-{ Quote: "Exactly why I bought WinRAR. Also, 7-Zip does not allow the adding of files to an existing archive." }-
As for what I know, 7-Zip (as nearly all archivers I know) can add files to existing archives.
Some exceptions: 7-Zip cannot add files to RAR as it supports it only for extraction, and some archive formats does not allow adding files to a solid archive (but the latter case applies to any archiver supporting such designed format).

[Mr.PC]

-{ Quote: "You forgot arrow pointing at "Create solid archive" Mr. PC -
the more files the more important it can be http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solid_compression 7z does it as well :)
Tried LibreOffice which is 464mb.
7zip 102.887 kb, Winrar 121.150 kb - both solid
7zip 135.843 kb, Winrar 143.484 kb - both normal" }-
No doubt. Solid and Best (not Good or Normal) are the best options for WinRAR.
I made the necessary correction (http://www.wilderssecurity.com/showpost.php?p=1815149&postcount=27).:)

[Bambo]

Yep and Uharc is better than both of them btw. 100.220kb :) With max. dictionary size and PPM method. Nice little GUI for it here http://code.google.com/p/mulder/downloads/detail?name=UHARC_GUI.2007-01-19.zip&can=2&q=&sort=-uploaded I tried increasing dictionary and word size in 7zip, not much better 400kb or so. Effect probably depend on content.

[Cutting_Edgetech]

I use Winrar because it compresses, and decompresses files really fast. As others have already stated it also compresses files to a considerably small size. I also like to use Winzip because of its internal photo viewer, and it has several other features that Winrar does not have. I have Winzip, and Winrar installed on my computer with Winrar set as my default archiver.

[Bambo]

I don't have any use for it but I don't think 7zip has anything like Winrars recovery feature. Redundant, just adding more kbs to archive or must-have might depend on experience. Must be annoying to receive a huge file via internet and then find it is unusable because of format - or in Winrars case recovery info was not added to save kbs. Don't know if 7zip has improved with this.