• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

WinRAR 4.20 gets multi-threaded support

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Eeqmcsq said:
When you guys are running these compression tests, how do you know the performance improvement isn't being helped by the files being cached in RAM from your previous test?
Click to expand...
Shut down / turn back on your computer after each test ? 😛

Makaveli said:
I can run a 7zip compression test when I get home.

Any ideas on what you want in the compression test is a source folder with just mp3's ok?
Click to expand...
For a mix, I tried compressing/decompressing my "Program Files" folder:

Program Files.rar 8:45/1:39 550MB (WinRar 4.20 default / multi-thread)
Program Files.7z 14:17/2:29 432MB (7-zip 9.20 default - 2 threads)
Program Files.7z 10:26/2:08 434MB (7-zip 9.28 Alpha default - 4 threads)

This was on 32-bit. 64-bit and 4C/8T may give it different speed ratios...

One thing I found odd, is that just opening the RAR file (to browse) seems to take around 10 seconds, but opening the 7z file takes 0 seconds. Maybe this "initial RAR loading" is to help save time when you're trying to extract 'individual files' (?), as 7-zip seems to "filter through a chunk" to get to a single file or something. This difference makes me want to read up more on how these RAR/7z files work internally, seems kind of intriguing, this.
 
Last edited:
CPU @ 4.0Ghz

Nothing disabled

6UlyQ.jpg


Core 5/6/7/8 Disabled


eEuMH.jpg


Core 3/4/7/8 Disabled

PnNQB.jpg


Core 7/8 Disabled

C5oJx.jpg
 
Interesting. Im also around 80-90% Load when running the test. Wonder why it cant reach 100%.

Also rerunning ti quickly etc can really screw results. My results are up to 20% different from one another.
 
very nice... i've always loved winrar and stayed loyal to it for about 10 years. i recently switched over to 7zip because it's free. the interface is simple and clean. and the 7z archive was packing a little better than winrar was with rar
 
ninaholic37 said:
Shut down / turn back on your computer after each test ? 😛


For a mix, I tried compressing/decompressing my "Program Files" folder:

Program Files.rar 8:45/1:39 550MB (WinRar 4.20 default / multi-thread)
Program Files.7z 14:17/2:29 432MB (7-zip 9.20 default - 2 threads)
Program Files.7z 10:26/2:08 434MB (7-zip 9.28 Alpha default - 4 threads)

This was on 32-bit. 64-bit and 4C/8T may give it different speed ratios...

One thing I found odd, is that just opening the RAR file (to browse) seems to take around 10 seconds, but opening the 7z file takes 0 seconds. Maybe this "initial RAR loading" is to help save time when you're trying to extract 'individual files' (?), as 7-zip seems to "filter through a chunk" to get to a single file or something. This difference makes me want to read up more on how these RAR/7z files work internally, seems kind of intriguing, this.
Click to expand...

Interesting find so based on your results 7 zip is a abit slower but it seemed to make the file smaller. Haven't noticed the browsing difference will check this out now.

MentalIlness said:
Would a SSD make any difference in this ?
Click to expand...

I was wondering this myself so I will do a test with source data on my SSD aswell as my RAM disc.


boxleitnerb said:
i7-2600K@4GHz (all threads)
7,500kB/s, CPU load 70-90%
Click to expand...

Based on your results looks like SB is just a tad faster than Bulldozer when both are at 4Ghz on this test. Which makes sense cause BD is able to close the gap when there is an app that can actually use alot of cores.

Can we get some IVY/SB-E results at 4.0ghz aswell?
 
Last edited:
It seams SSD is having a big role in the performance,

Intel Core i7 920@4GHz with Intel SSD 320 120GB SATA-II

WinRar 4.2 64bit
winrar42corei79204ghz.jpg


Edit: Perhaps its the Triple Channel Memory ??
 
AtenRa said:
It seams SSD is having a big role in the performance,

Intel Core i7 920@4GHz with Intel SSD 320 120GB SATA-II

WinRar 4.2 64bit
winrar42corei79204ghz.jpg


Edit: Perhaps its the Triple Channel Memory ??
Click to expand...

It is interesting that your numbers are higher than SB at 4ghz.

I think you maybe right about the extra memory bandwidth.

I need someone with SB-E @ 4ghz which is a quad channel setup to post if there numbers are higher than what i posted this should confirm your theory.
 
MentalIlness said:
...
Click to expand...

Awesome thanks!
Can you re-run the first one? It says current is ~7400, but result was ~7000.

Bulldozer modules mapped 1/2 + 3/4 + 5/6 + 7/8...I wonder what would happen if we tried one with 2/4/6/8 disabled. Interesting that the per-module score jumped significantly when you disabled entire modules. Perhaps the modules are a little L3 cache or L3 bandwidth starved? Edit: probably bandwidth...
 
Last edited:
OK, final verdict ...... RAM Bandwidth

Triple Channel 1532MHz 9-9-9-24
winrar42corei79204ghz.jpg


Dual Channel 1532MHz 9-9-9-24
winrar42corei79204ghzdu.jpg


Triple Channel 1150MHz 9-9-9-24
winrar42corei79204ghztr.jpg


Dual Channel 1150MHz 9-9-9-24
winrar42corei79204ghzdu.jpg


Socket 2011 owners favorable benchmark 😀
 
AtenRa said:
OK, final verdict ...... RAM Bandwidth

Triple Channel 1532MHz 9-9-9-24
winrar42corei79204ghz.jpg


Dual Channel 1532MHz 9-9-9-24
winrar42corei79204ghzdu.jpg


Triple Channel 1150MHz 9-9-9-24
winrar42corei79204ghztr.jpg


Dual Channel 1150MHz 9-9-9-24
winrar42corei79204ghzdu.jpg


Socket 2011 owners favorable benchmark 😀
Click to expand...

Awesome thanks for the testing. So it looks like winrar cares more about core count and memory bandwidth over IPC.
 
soccerballtux said:
^nice.

So if we overclocked a Bulldozer to 4.8Ghz, we would get over 9000 and be faster than a 4Ghz SB-E...
Click to expand...

hmm no!

I'm doing 12k at 4Ghz, SB-E should best my results do to having one extra memory channel.

BD would have to be at 5.2Ghz+ to come close!
 
Last edited:
Depends on the ram he was running with the FX.

@MentalIlness
what frequency do you run the ram with the BD ??
 
Thats one crazy memory dependency. Specially compared to 7z.
I wonder if it will be improved in the future. WinRAR just seems overly dependent on main memory. Atleast for the inbuildt bench.

39731.png
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top