View Full Version : CorePack Compression methods ? Help
ramazan19833
09-09-2016, 23:01
CorePack Compression methods ? Help:confused:
I don't see anything strange in corepack !! they Just are clever in ripping unnecessary files or language files , other thing they are using normal methods :)
As he said, they are very clever in ripping useless stuffs, I remember them ripping Multiplayer out of CoD: Advanced Warfare which no other repack teams could do at that time, same they did with DOOM. BTW, is this forum just about knowing and copying other groups methods ?
As he said, they are very clever in ripping useless stuffs, I remember them ripping Multiplayer out of CoD: Advanced Warfare which no other repack teams could do at that time, same they did with DOOM. BTW, is this forum just about knowing and copying other groups methods ?
Here you can find all about compressing [tools , methods , precompressors ,] not only other groups methods :D
Corepack is one of the oldest repacking team in the repacking field and by the time they know exacty which files should be ripped.....like the best thing is that they replace the game intros by their corepack intro or they just re-encode it...............but fitgirl....hmmm you know
Corepack is one of the oldest repacking team in the repacking field and by the time they know exacty which files should be ripped.....like the best thing is that they replace the game intros by their corepack intro or they just re-encode it...............but fitgirl....hmmm you know
What ? they don't put their logos now, it was in the past but now they don't put their logos.
Typical Corepack string looks like this, afair:
srep+delta+lzma:177mb:fb273:lc8
It's generic and well-known, aside of using delta, which should never be used by default, as it make compression worse in 90% of cases, make it slightly better in 8% of cases and only in 2% of cases gives noticeable compression gain with LZMA. These numbers based on my huge bruteforcing database I build through my repacking.
I told about it to Shiv in the beginning of 2015, but he doesn't like to learn, so the delta is still in there.
So if you copied your compression string with delta from someone else - get rid of it and never use blindly. Delta is a very specific byte-mixing filter, which can help only with certain types of data.
And yes, as stated above, CP's "records" are build on ripping data, not on actual compression.
Typical Corepack string looks like this, afair:
srep+delta+lzma:177mb:fb273:lc8
It's generic and well-known, aside of using delta, which should never be used by default, as it make compression worse in 90% of cases, make it slightly better in 8% of cases and only in 2% of cases gives noticeable compression gain with LZMA. These numbers based on my huge bruteforcing database I build through my repacking.
I told about it to Shiv in the beginning of 2015, but he doesn't like to learn, so the delta is still in there.
So if you copied your compression string with delta from someone else - get rid of it and never use blindly. Delta is a very specific byte-mixing filter, which can help only with certain types of data.
And yes, as stated above, CP's "records" are build on ripping data, not on actual compression.
what do you mean by worse ?? do you mean compression ratio or speed of de/compressing ??
And yes, as stated above, CP's "records" are build on ripping data, not on actual compression.
Pffff, you hate CorePack, just say that directly.
Pffff, you hate CorePack, just say that directly.
Me too :D , I don't know what is the reason but i don't like them :( Maybe 1 year ago I download a 20 GB repack & what it was corrupted !! As for someone from EGYPT to download 20 GB is taking about 7 days X 15 hour Downloading
Razor12911
10-09-2016, 12:42
Hehe, moderators nowadays are too lenient it's even funny.
what do you mean by worse ?? do you mean compression ratio or speed of de/compressing ??
Compression ratio only. De(compression) is almost the same, this operation is not mathematically heavy.
Hehe, moderators nowadays are too lenient it's even funny.
Well, I hope they won't remove my "delta thoughts", cause this is too real :)
RamiroCruzo
10-09-2016, 20:07
Hmm...Hmmm...Delta isn't some usual brute force compressor, it detects data tables and minimizes them. Well, in simple words, eliminate repetitions of data. This is an old benchmark from Delta libraries, hope you find it intriguing...
Orginal File = 601 MB (630.408.442 bytes)
CCMX 6 = 282 MB (296.109.161 bytes)
DEL + CCMX 6 = 284 MB (298.355.666 bytes)
RZM = 321 MB (337.587.110 bytes)
DEL + RZM = 309 MB (324.613.378 bytes)
REP + RZM = 321 MB (337.189.036 bytes)
DEL + REP + RZM = 309 MB (324.184.644 bytes)
Hey Razor bro, whats up? :D:D:D
panker1992
10-09-2016, 20:29
Srep can indirectly show if delta is good or not, anything srep's ratio can go below 70 or 65% then delta helps.
dont forget that srep delta and lzma are all based on lz77 matchfinding architecture :D
RamiroCruzo
10-09-2016, 20:51
dont forget that srep delta and lzma are all based on lz77 matchfinding architecture :D
At last, someone with knowledge worth to talk...Haha..
You hope to replace every reoccurrence firstly and then again try to do so and hope it will be smaller...LOL...It's Common Sense of Humanity Missus....
[QUOTE=panker1992]Srep can indirectly show if delta is good or not, anything srep's ratio can go below 70 or 65% then delta helps./QUOTE]
Not corrensponds to my tests at all. Especially bad delta behaves on different textures data. As SREP is just a simple LZ77 with extra-large dictionary, it can't say if the data consists of binary tables or not.
In my brute-forcing sctipts is always one of the steps, but as i said above, it rarely gives any benefit, but makes compression worst in much more cases.
Mad Max is a good example. It hase astonoshing srep removal rate, but using delta will hurt the compression ratio due to lots of textures inside.
Razor12911
11-09-2016, 09:33
Well, I hope they won't remove my "delta thoughts", cause this is too real :)
Nah, it's not that it's just that back in the days, you mentioned a warez group, you got a warning or the thread is closed, or banned. Things change I guess.
Hey Razor bro, whats up? :D:D:D
The sky?
Chayan Manna
13-10-2016, 02:54
Corepacks Just use a modified Version of Precomp. They Use Precomp+Srep64+Lzma64.
Razor12911
13-10-2016, 03:45
Corepacks Just use a modified Version of Precomp. They Use Precomp+Srep64+Lzma64.
Modified precomp? :v since when they know how to program?
Modified precomp? :v since when they know how to program?
Razor I'd like to ask you because i saw a Zlib1.dll which is around 50 kb , the one we use is around 100 KB I found it in SYter Repacks so any difference ?? :D
Updated
the same as FitGirl the both are using Zlib1.dll with precomp038 which is 59 KB :D Those 2 Guys are using same methods / tools almost the same
updated
Same as precomp 321KB , original ~600kb less size than usual so is they using a modified version or they are basically compressing it ??
updated
also precomop043
original size 1.015 KB the one they are using is 1.160 KB :D now i don't think they compressed the files I'm not sure about it's modified or not But maybe i'll do some speed tests :D
Razor12911
13-10-2016, 09:24
-Razor I'd like to ask you because i saw a Zlib1.dll which is around 50 kb , the one we use is around 100 KB I found it in SYter Repacks so any difference ??
Well zlib1.dll is a library older versions of precomp used, precomp038-042, basically all precomp executables less than 500kb in size, if more than, it means zlib library is compiled along with exe.
-zlib1.dll as well, 59kb and 100kb, same difference, the 100kb is the latest, I grabbed it from zlib site, there definitely is a reason for the update, so why not grab it, initially it was 59kb zlib1.dll.
the same as FitGirl the both are using Zlib1.dll with precomp038 which is 59 KB Those 2 Guys are using same methods / tools almost the same
the usage of different zlib1.dll doesn't improve compression, plus a lot of people include the library even when its not used, once precomp.exe is more than 500kb or rather 800kb to be safe, it means the exe comes with compiled zlib functions.
-Same as precomp 321KB , original ~600kb less size than usual so is they using a modified version or they are basically compressing it ??
-_-, ever heard of different zlib versions? 321kb is bascially precomp0.38 that uses zlib1.dll.
-also precomop043
1.015 KB is original size, 1.160 KB version contains cls patch that allows for cls-precomp.dll to be able to show progress when decompressing, without patch, either you don't get progress of extraction or cls fails, this patch is made available to every one, it's made by ProFrager.
Razor12911
13-10-2016, 09:51
just ran a benchmark:
precomp038 (321 KB) with zlib1.dll (58.5 KB): 82.3 MB (86*347*072 bytes) > 373 MB (391*155*058 bytes) took 151906 ms
precomp038 (321 KB) with zlib1.dll (105 KB): 82.3 MB (86*347*072 bytes) > 373 MB (391*155*058 bytes) took 143078 ms
precomp038 (1.23 MB): 82.3 MB (86*347*072 bytes) > 373 MB (391*155*058 bytes) took 166093 ms
Same output size, zlib1.dll (58.5 KB) is version 1.2.3, zlib1.dll (105 KB) is version 1.2.8, there definitely is a reason for updates.
just ran a benchmark:
precomp038 (321 KB) with zlib1.dll (58.5 KB): 82.3 MB (86*347*072 bytes) > 373 MB (391*155*058 bytes) took 151906 ms
precomp038 (321 KB) with zlib1.dll (105 KB): 82.3 MB (86*347*072 bytes) > 373 MB (391*155*058 bytes) took 143078 ms
precomp038 (1.23 MB): 82.3 MB (86*347*072 bytes) > 373 MB (391*155*058 bytes) took 166093 ms
Same output size, zlib1.dll (58.5 KB) is version 1.2.3, zlib1.dll (105 KB) is version 1.2.8, there definitely is a reason for updates. yes you are right , also decompression is the almost same time
But why fitgirl or syter is using such an old thing ?? I don't think they don't know about Zlib1 updates !! there must be something else :D Baby yes Baby no :v BTW thnx for ur quick replay Razor ^_^
delta isn't lz, it's more like multimedia preprocessors like mm in freearc and delta in 7-zip
http://encode.ru/threads/1045-Delta-binary-tables-preprocessor
it's advantageous on binary data such as executables, databases, mail archives, but probably bad on multimedia data like those textures
Blade2239
16-10-2016, 10:19
What's best thing to compress texture files like .dds (without losing quality) and wav audio files files too....
Hello Blade2239.
Do you was tried MSC?
Blade2239
16-10-2016, 22:31
Hello Blade2239.
Do you was tried MSC?
Hi gozrack
No didn't tried it is it like Perugino or what means it's an additional file or like comes with any compressor
edward99
25-10-2016, 02:12
why do they compress better
because they delete useless files that's why they compress better
Blade2239
25-10-2016, 02:33
why do they compress better
because they delete useless files that's why they compress better
Like crunch texture.......?????
And how it deletes the files means how it know which files is useless
edward99
25-10-2016, 04:12
bro such as all languages but English
multiplayer if it has
Chayan Manna
10-07-2017, 10:40
Modified precomp? :v since when they know how to program?
Sorry my fault.
They uses 1.160 KB version of Precomp which contains cls patch but with brute.
TheGeekyGamer
09-08-2018, 06:00
Me too :D , I don't know what is the reason but i don't like them :( Maybe 1 year ago I download a 20 GB repack & what it was corrupted !! As for someone from EGYPT to download 20 GB is taking about 7 days X 15 hour Downloading
Yeah that's true CorePack messed up with GTA V badly too... i wasted 27 GB of data.. lol
Necro...
Btw, if you haven't noticed yet
Hello everyone
For the past year, we have been working so hard to do our best, tried to avoid as many mistakes as we can. But it seems past came back to haunt us. For the past few hours, we have been trying to figure out what exactly happened. [ShadowHacker] was one of our Website Administrators back in 2015. It's surprising that for the past 3 years, no one has noticed there is a virus in the redist folder until now. We are not denying it, the file is definitely a virus. We don't know if it was intentionally put in there or it was just a mistake. One of our Admins talked to him today but we couldn't get any clear answers to our questions.
As Administrators of CorePack, we take the full blame and responsibility. It's a huge mistake we have made. We completely trusted our staff, and somehow it made us forget that anyone can make a mistake whether they are trusted or not.
CorePack is not just a website where you can download repacks, it's a community. We care about each and every member of it. We have never done anything intentionally to harm our members. We truly apologize for the trouble this has caused. We understand that the damage this has done is not small and simply saying sorry isn't gonna fix anything.
We take full responsibilities for it. Our initial decision was to shut down CorePack but after discussing with staff and some of our dedicated members, We can't just let go of 4 years of ours and fan's dedication and hard work that easily just because of one person's mistake which he made 3 years ago . Again, we are really sorry for all the trouble we have caused. We are forever grateful to everyone who has supported us throughout all these years.
Thank you,
CorePack Team.
vBulletin® v3.8.11, Copyright ©2000-2026, vBulletin Solutions Inc.