4 ms·
No, xz (on a particular level setting) is both faster than bzip2 and provides better compression ratio, but zpaq is just slower.
by dchest 11y ago
No, xz (on a particular level setting) is both faster than bzip2 and provides better compression ratio, but zpaq is just slower.
- mappu 11y ago>No, xz (on a particular level setting) is both faster than bzip2 and provides better compression ratio, but zpaq is just slower. Are you implying that xz out-compresses zpaq? Can you supply a benchmark? Here's one from me - http://mattmahoney.net/dc/text.html http://mattmahoney.net/dc/text.html - showing a very significant compression ratio advantage to zpaq.
- dchest 11y agoNo, where did you find this implication in my comment? What I meant is that: * xz is faster than bzip2 and provides better compression ratio [than bzip2] * zpaq is slower [than bzip2 and provides better compression ratio than bzip2] But looks like I'm mistaken? It seems like it can be faster and give better compression ratio than bzip2, can it?