On Thu, 17 Jul 2014 14:24:00 +0200 (CEST)
Norman Köhring <koehr_AT_mailbox.org> wrote:
> Not so much. I tried it with an image, which should be quite nice to compress
> (quite uniform, dark colours). Here for you to compare:
>
> 632K image.png
> 5.5M image.simpleimageformat
How did you convert it. Did I miss something? :D
> 607K image.lzma /* lzma --best --extreme … */
> 608K image.xz /* xz --best --extreme … */
> 931K image.gz /* gzip --best … */
> 578K image.bz2 /* bzip2 --best … */
> 1.1M image.lz4 /* lz4 -9 … */
Thanks for the list. BZ2 seems like the best way to go ;).
> Last one is super fast in compression. bzip2 feels quite slow already. XZ and
> LZMA are super slow. All are fast in decompression.
It's all about decompression, so a little overhead in compression is ok.
Cheers
FRIGN
--
FRIGN <dev_AT_frign.de>
Received on Thu Jul 17 2014 - 15:06:50 CEST