Post Reply 
[useless thread] gzip compression
Author Message
ZiNgA BuRgA
Smart Alternative

Posts: 17,022.2988
Threads: 1,174
Joined: 19th Jan 2007
Reputation: -1.71391
E-Pigs: 446.1274
Offline
Post: #1
[useless thread] gzip compression
GZip/deflate appears to be surprisingly good for compressing mostly compressed stuff...

Compressing [CoalGuys] B Gata H Kei - 01 [531DF322].mkv with 7-Zip 9.12:

(LZMA/2 use a 64MB dictionary, 2 threads, 64 bytes word size)


Original size: 374,233,074 bytes

.7z
Store:         374,233,256 bytes
LZMA:          377,964,947 bytes
LZMA2:         373,963,350 bytes
BZip2:         374,750,452 bytes

.gz
Deflate        373,694,877 bytes

.xz
LZMA2          373,963,224 bytes


But LZMA2 does appear to be a superior algorithm in general.
(This post was last modified: 03/05/2010 02:03 AM by ZiNgA BuRgA.)
03/05/2010 02:00 AM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Assassinator
...

Posts: 6,646.6190
Threads: 176
Joined: 24th Apr 2007
Reputation: 8.53695
E-Pigs: 140.8363
Offline
Post: #2
RE: [useless thread] gzip compression
0.1% smaller!!!


EDIT: what about that really crazy algorithm?  PAQ or whatever it's called.... let me guess.... it would take too long to do?
(This post was last modified: 03/05/2010 02:35 AM by Assassinator.)
03/05/2010 02:18 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ZiNgA BuRgA
Smart Alternative

Posts: 17,022.2988
Threads: 1,174
Joined: 19th Jan 2007
Reputation: -1.71391
E-Pigs: 446.1274
Offline
Post: #3
RE: [useless thread] gzip compression
(03/05/2010 02:18 AM)Assassinator Wrote:  0.1% smaller!!!
I like to think in absolute terms :P.  Reducing a 1GB file to 900MB is much better than reducing a 100MB file to 20MB, on the consideration of file storage and downloading ;)

I dunno why Deflate was removed as an option from the 7-Zip GUI for 7z archives (maybe cause LZMA2 pretty much covers everything?) - the CLI still supports it.  PPMd > LZMA/2 for text, but I dunno why BZip2 is there...

(03/05/2010 02:18 AM)Assassinator Wrote:  EDIT: what about that really crazy algorithm?  PAQ or whatever it's called.... let me guess.... it would take too long to do?
No-one cares about PAQ!
(This post was last modified: 03/05/2010 02:51 AM by ZiNgA BuRgA.)
03/05/2010 02:49 AM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
PSPkiller
*The Sweaty Indian/Welsh Guy*

Posts: 2,393.2167
Threads: 251
Joined: 24th Jun 2007
Reputation: 0.56947
E-Pigs: 53.7911
Offline
Post: #4
RE: [useless thread] gzip compression
WHY IS EVERYTHING CENTRE ALIGNED?????

[Insert Signature Here]
03/05/2010 03:07 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ZiNgA BuRgA
Smart Alternative

Posts: 17,022.2988
Threads: 1,174
Joined: 19th Jan 2007
Reputation: -1.71391
E-Pigs: 446.1274
Offline
Post: #5
RE: [useless thread] gzip compression
(03/05/2010 03:07 AM)PSPkiller Wrote:  WHY IS EVERYTHING CENTRE ALIGNED?????
Cause you're wearing your glasses sideways.
03/05/2010 03:15 AM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Assassinator
...

Posts: 6,646.6190
Threads: 176
Joined: 24th Apr 2007
Reputation: 8.53695
E-Pigs: 140.8363
Offline
Post: #6
RE: [useless thread] gzip compression
(03/05/2010 02:49 AM)ZiNgA BuRgA Wrote:  
(03/05/2010 02:18 AM)Assassinator Wrote:  0.1% smaller!!!
I like to think in absolute terms :P.  Reducing a 1GB file to 900MB is much better than reducing a 100MB file to 20MB, on the consideration of file storage and downloading ;)

Ok then...

538197B = ~0.5MB smaller.

>.>
03/05/2010 10:33 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ZiNgA BuRgA
Smart Alternative

Posts: 17,022.2988
Threads: 1,174
Joined: 19th Jan 2007
Reputation: -1.71391
E-Pigs: 446.1274
Offline
Post: #7
RE: [useless thread] gzip compression
(03/05/2010 10:33 PM)Assassinator Wrote:  Ok then...

538197B = ~0.5MB smaller.

>.>
"640K ought to be enough for anybody"
03/05/2010 10:41 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Shady
Sometimes when poo, I hungry

Posts: 4,355.4586
Threads: 472
Joined: 18th Mar 2007
Reputation: 9.99582
E-Pigs: 508.0987
Offline
Post: #8
RE: [useless thread] gzip compression
(15/05/2010 11:33 AM)Jeffrey364 Wrote:  - I just posted this on google bizz

Regards

Jeffrey

don't you mean google buzz??

(09/06/2011 06:25 AM)S7* Wrote:  Spambots are strange, mysterious creatures.
15/05/2010 11:50 AM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ZiNgA BuRgA
Smart Alternative

Posts: 17,022.2988
Threads: 1,174
Joined: 19th Jan 2007
Reputation: -1.71391
E-Pigs: 446.1274
Offline
Post: #9
RE: [useless thread] gzip compression
Lol, fail spammer.
16/05/2010 01:55 AM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ZiNgA BuRgA
Smart Alternative

Posts: 17,022.2988
Threads: 1,174
Joined: 19th Jan 2007
Reputation: -1.71391
E-Pigs: 446.1274
Offline
Post: #10
RE: [useless thread] gzip compression
Hmm, I always thought LZMA was superior to RAR for textual content.  Doesn't always seem to be the case...

XThreads script v1.10 - uncompressed = 210,215 bytes

RAR - WinRAR 3.90
Best compression (solid) = 41,578 bytes

7z - 7-Zip 9.13 beta
LZMA (solid) 128MB dict, 64 word size, 1 thread = 47,483 bytes
LZMA2 (solid) 128MB dict, 64 word size, 1 thread = 47,484 bytes
PPMd (solid) 256MB dict, 32 word size, 1 thread = 39,601 bytes

PAQ8
PAQ8KX Max compression = 30,432 bytes (took 1.9GB of RAM and 101 seconds to do the job)
PAQ8PF Max compression = 35,268 bytes (took 1.2GB of RAM and 2.7 seconds to do the job)
(This post was last modified: 04/06/2010 11:03 PM by ZiNgA BuRgA.)
04/06/2010 10:40 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 


Forum Jump:


User(s) browsing this thread:

 Quick Theme: