Comparison
The
following table compares the performance of most of the popular lossless compressors.
Sort by Efficiency
| Sort by Compression | Sort
by Speed
|
Compressor |
Efficiency* |
Time for Album (650 MB) |
Compression: Size of Album (650 MB) / % |
Playing |
|
Monkey's Audio 3.86b1 (high) |
208.5 |
2.2 min |
367.1 MB / 56.5% |
Winamp (with seeking); <1% CPU |
|
MonkeyÆs Audio 3.86b1 (normal) |
206.9 |
1.8 min |
373.3 MB / 57.4% |
Winamp (with seeking); <1% CPU |
|
MonkeyÆs Audio 3.86b1 (fast) |
200.2 |
1.4 min |
385.7 MB / 59.3% |
Winamp (with seeking); <1% CPU |
|
Monkey's Audio 3.86b1 (extra high) |
199.3 |
6.7 min |
360.0 MB / 55.4% |
Winamp (with seeking); <3% CPU |
|
Perfect Clarity Audio (Siren Jukebox 2.0) |
195.5 |
3.0 min |
379.5 MB / 58.4% |
Siren Jukebox only; 3% - 4% CPU |
|
WavPack 3.6 (high) |
194.0 |
2.6 min |
383.8 MB / 59.1% |
Winamp (with seeking); <1% CPU |
|
RKAU 1.07 (fast) |
191.1 |
9.2 min |
366.4 MB / 56.4% |
Winamp (with seeking); 8% - 10% CPU |
|
LPAC 3.01 (extra high û not random access) |
190.8 |
9.6 min |
366.1 MB / 56.3% |
Winamp (with seeking); ~1% CPU |
|
Shorten |
188.1 |
1.9 min |
397.0 MB / 61.1% |
Winamp (can't seek); <1% CPU |
|
FLAC 0.7 (default) |
188.0 |
6.2 min |
378.0 MB / 58.2% |
Winamp (not functional on test machine) |
|
WavArc 1.1 (-c1) |
187.0 |
2.3 min |
395.6 MB / 60.9% |
CanÆt play |
|
LPAC 1.01 (fast) |
185.2 |
2.3 min |
397.9 MB / 61.2% |
Winamp (with seeking); <1% CPU |
|
LPAC 3.01 (fast û not random access) |
184.9 |
2.4 min |
397.6 MB / 61.2% |
Winamp (with seeking); <1% CPU |
|
WavPack 3.6 (normal) |
184.4 |
2.1 min |
400.3 MB / 61.6% |
Winamp (with seeking); <1% CPU |
|
RKAU 1.07 (normal) |
183.5 |
17.4 min |
366.8 MB / 56.4% |
Winamp (with seeking); 9% - 11% CPU |
|
WavPack 3.6 (fast) |
179.8 |
2.0 min |
407.6 MB / 62.7% |
Winamp (with seeking); <1% CPU |
|
WaveZIP 2.01 |
176.8 |
2.4 min |
408.9 MB / 62.9% |
CanÆt play |
|
RKAU 1.07 (high) |
172.3 |
43.5 min |
368.2 MB / 56.7% |
Winamp (with seeking); 11% - 13% CPU |
|
WavArc 1.1 (-c5) |
167.7 |
61.7 min |
369.8 MB / 56.9% |
CanÆt play |
|
RAR (Winrar 2.70, max with ôûmmö) |
150.3 |
11.4 min |
424.0 MB / 65.2% |
CanÆt play |
|
ZIP (Winrar 2.70, max) |
34.1 |
5.9 min |
600.7 MB / 92.4% |
CanÆt play |
All tests were run on a 850 Celeron II (566 overclocked) with 128mb of ram under Windows 2000.
Results based on a sample of 3 songs representing a wide spectrum of music:
* Efficiency tries to evaluate the trade-off between speed and compression. The idea is to analyze how much "bang" you get for the time you wait while compressing. If you wait a long time but don't get good compression, that's poor efficiency. If it goes super fast, but you don't get hardly any compression, that's bad efficiency too. The idea is to try to strike a good balance between speed and compression. Obviously, rating efficiency is somewhat subjective because it depends on how long you're willing to wait for extra space savings... hopefully you'll agree that this equation is at least somewhat fair. (Mathematically, efficiency can be described: [Efficiency] = ([MB Saved]16 / [Seconds])(1/16) )
If you have any questions, suggestions, comments, or bug reports you can contact the author at email@monkeysaudio.com