7Z vs RAR vs ZIP: Comprehensive Compression Format Comparison
Compressed files reduce storage space by minimizing the total number of bits and bytes. The three most popular compression formats are ZIP, RAR, and 7Z. Compression algorithms vary, affecting compression ratio and speed. These formats also offer encryption for enhanced security.
This article compares 7Z, RAR, and ZIP through tests on different file sizes and types, evaluating compression speed and ratio, as well as security features.
- Part 1. Image File Compression Format Comparison
- Part 2. Text File Compression Format Comparison
- Part 3. Video File Compression Format Comparison
- Part 4. Best Archive Format for Compression
Tests were conducted using files of various sizes (15MB, 100MB, 500MB) and types (image, text, video) to ensure comprehensive comparison.
Part 1. Image File Compression Format Comparison
Original uncompressed images
15MB image files
For 15MB images, all three formats compressed in approximately one second. 7Z achieved a compression ratio of 88%, while RAR and ZIP were around 94%.
100MB image files
Note: Compression time for ZIP wasn't recorded due to the use of Windows' built-in tool.
7Z and ZIP took about 2 seconds, while RAR took around 10 seconds for 100MB images.
7Z led with an 11% compression ratio, while RAR and ZIP were around 94%.
500MB image files
7Z took about 12 seconds, RAR took 10 seconds, and ZIP took 24 seconds for 500MB images.
7Z achieved the best compression ratio at 6%, while RAR and ZIP were around 93%.
7Z was the top performer for image files in both speed and compression ratio.
Part 2. Text File Compression Format Comparison
Original uncompressed text files
Text files are generally easy to compress.
15MB text files
All three formats compressed 15MB text files in about one second. 7Z and RAR achieved a 0.09% compression ratio, while ZIP was 1.4%.
100MB text files
7Z took about 5 seconds, while ZIP and RAR completed in one second.
7Z and RAR had a 0.7% compression ratio, while ZIP was 1.4%.
500MB text files
7Z took about 14 seconds, while RAR and ZIP took around 3 seconds.
7Z and RAR achieved a 0.7% compression ratio, while ZIP was 1.3%.
7Z and RAR had similar compression ratios for text files, but RAR was faster.
Part 3. Video File Compression Format Comparison
Original uncompressed video files
15MB video files
All formats compressed 15MB video files in about one second. 7Z achieved a 70% compression ratio, RAR was 88%, and ZIP was 95%.
100MB video files
7Z took about 5 seconds, while ZIP and RAR completed in four seconds.
7Z and RAR had a 77.8% compression ratio, while ZIP was 87.7%.
500MB video files
ZIP was the fastest at 17 seconds, followed by 7Z at 20 seconds, and RAR at 26 seconds.
RAR achieved a 61.9% compression ratio, 7Z was 63%, and ZIP was 85.7%.
RAR had the best compression ratio for large video files, while ZIP was the fastest.
Note: The tests' data effects may not be very pronounced, but differences among formats become more significant with larger data.
Part 4. Best Archive Format for Compression
After comparing 7Z, RAR, and ZIP, it's clear that ZIP excels in speed, while 7Z leads in compression ratio, especially for images. RAR optimizes video compression effectively.
RAR offers superior security due to its proprietary encryption algorithm. 7Z and ZIP are free, while RAR requires a purchase. ZIP remains widely used due to its integration in Windows and Mac.
