![]() |
CLS-ZStd
1 Attachment(s)
Here's CLS version of ZStd, ran some tests, it's fast during compression because no temps are created, also added multi threading feature, it's only effective if you use a high level to compress, also if the chunk size is high as well, then it is effective, if you're using level 1 for example, and you try to use multi threading, just know that it is going to be slow, since level 1 is almost like copying a file, just adding multi threaded copying doesn't mean speed will be fast, it will drop.
During decompression, I ran tests as well, it's also fast, you can easily get more than 200mb/s. Decompression is single threaded. |
This is nice i'll test.
Update............. Nice speed. I was tried chunks like 50m or 1g and 8b and the percent freeze in 9% or 100%. But in 1024k works very well. Maybe only accept k in chunks. Also pack and unpack no errors. Tested with 80 gb folder. Threads 6 level 21 chunks 1024k we need the felice2011 benchmark here!!! |
Quote:
|
Ok thanks for the tip.
With 8b the progress stack in 9% and complete the job without errors. In 50m percent goes quick to 100% and stack to complete the job. In 1g arc.exe crash. In any case works this cls works faster. |
1G chunks? Lol
And using 6 threads. That's 1GBx2x6 = 12GB Ram usage. X86 is limited to 2GB. Memory usage is calculated as chunk size x 2 x number of threads |
Hey wow ok. it's a test men. My tests goes from 0 to the limit of the program.
|
I place an quick test of compression and decompression with enwik8, with and without cls.dll, with a block of memory resident in the 16384k heap, to equal the same compression ratio in response to the use of zstd without the cls.
I also tried to use 8 threads, the speed of compression increases considerably, but the cpu ... squirts to hell, with freeze pc if not adequately cooled. zstd without cls Code:
-↓- [ CMD Bench.Test.Info v0.0.6c ] -↓- Compressed Archive Completed At -↓- 22/08/2016 19:18:24Code:
-↓- [ CMD Bench.Test.Info v0.0.6c ] -↓- Compressed Archive Completed At -↓- 22/08/2016 19:28:24Code:
[CLS]On the contrary, the decompression time has a lower speed of 15-17% with the use of cls, but in this case I think you should test larger files. These dll alternative by razor are a real boon from sky ...;) |
1 Attachment(s)
Hello mates, I was not here from long time due to my studies actually, I managed some time today, so thought for a modified version by me in ZSTD :D
What I did? 1. Actually increased speed around atleast 2mb/s with the same cls through modified zstdlib_x86.dll without any ratio loss. 2. Added latest compiled version of Zstd x32 and x64, additionally PZstd also! 3. I did some benchmarks also, for all tests level 19 was used, was tested for compression only and threads were set as 2(It doesn't matter in PZstd case), I have maximum 2 threads only. Test with new and older DLL Code:
Tests Between Zstd and Pzstd with the Modified DLL Code:
Edit: I will prefer to use zstd32_gcc620.exe or zstd64_gcc620.exe as zstd.exe for now with current Razor CLS. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Yup. I doubt that there will much diff though.
|
Code:
-↓- [ CMD Bench.Test.Info v0.0.6c ] -↓- Compressed Archive Completed At -↓- 08/10/2016 13:54:37Code:
Level=19Code:
pzstd -19 -f |
Quote:
|
Code:
-↓- [ CMD Bench.Test.Info v0.0.6c ] -↓- Compressed Archive Completed At -↓- 08/10/2016 17:14:41same all settings "-19" performed with enwik8. Try you also with the same input file:rolleyes: |
Quote:
|
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 17:53. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
FileForums @ https://fileforums.com