Super Compression Software

T

TheBossMan

Expert Member
Joined
Jan 30, 2007
Messages
1,737
Reaction score
0
Location
Somewhere far far away.
A friend told me about this software and I am blown away by the results..

http://kgbarchiver.net/

KGB Archiver is the compression tool with an unbelievably high compression rate. Unfortunately, in spite of its powerful compression rate, it has high hardware requirements (I recommend processor with 1,5GHz clock and 256MB of RAM as an essential minimum). One of the advantages of KGB Archiver is also AES-256 encryption which is used to encrypt the archives. This is one of the strongest encryptions known for man.
Click to expand...

The I started looking on the net for stuff to see what people have compressed with this and how much they managed to compress with this software.

Just google Vista 80MB for starters.. I mean that's mad how the hell can you compress from 3gb to 80mb...

Anyways Winrar got some serious work to do if they wanna come close to this people...
 
Excellent find, thanks man ;) Will definitely test it sometime.
 
TheBossMan said:
Just google Vista 80MB for starters.. I mean that's mad how the hell can you compress from 3gb to 80mb...
Click to expand...

I'll bet the extracted 3GB that you get from that 80MB contains lots of empty files. (Empty files compress much much more than "regular" files.) There's no way that you can compress an original Vista that much.

We had a similar discussion in another thread, that one turned out to be a mini-image of Windows.
 
Well I tried also wondered the same thing so I got Office 2007 which are compressed to 1.4Mb and extracted it. Ran the setup and it works perfectly.
Don't need to try Vista cause I allready have a original and not extra drive to test purposes.. Did however get good results compressing stuff om my HDD before backing up to DVD. (Must say not as great as those people, but still better than most other programs.)
 
1.4mb Office installation :eek: I say you lie. Mail me the file @ my member name at gmail.
 
I'm also very sceptical about this 1.4MB Office... but eagerly awaits tera's report on how it works :D
 
qinglung said:
I'll bet the extracted 3GB that you get from that 80MB contains lots of empty files. (Empty files compress much much more than "regular" files.) There's no way that you can compress an original Vista that much.

We had a similar discussion in another thread, that one turned out to be a mini-image of Windows.
Click to expand...
That was my initial reaction too. I think I shot the app down in the old thread too.

BUT

I've had a look at it and it does do excellent compression ratios...but it is slow (As in watching paint dry slow) and requires insane amounts of memory.


Rank Program Compressed size Compression time Memory
1 PAQ8HP8 133,423,109 64,639 sec. 1849 MiB
18 PPMd 183,976,014 880 sec. 256 MiB
44 bzip2 254,007,875 379 sec. 8 MiB
49 InfoZIP 322,649,703 104 sec. 0.1 MiB
Click to expand...

Or to sum it up: It does 27% better compression than the competition and takes 7200% longer.:rolleyes:

As for the 80mg Vista: I'm betting they used a stripped down vista image....which comes in at just under 500mb. So its 500mb->80mb, not 3gb->80mb.


eta: Oh and source is wiki.
 
Last edited:
Well, information theory says it's not possible!

I found some informative comments on one of the sites while searching for this 1.4MB Office (explains it much better than I could):

The thing is, you can't have this kind of universal, non-lossy compression. ANY compression algorithm will shrink some files, and expand others. The reason compression is helpful is that most of the types of files we commonly exchange (text, images, etc.) will usually be shrunk, and the kind of files that get expanded are files with 'random' data that we wouldn't compress anyway.

This is easy to prove. Assume that there is a compression algorithm that can compress ANY file by at least one bit. So take the set of all possible files that contain 20 bits. Our algorithm can compress all of these files to a maximum size of 19 bits. Here's the problem - there are 2^20 = 1,048,576 unique files that can be composed of 20 bits. However, there are 2^19 = 524,288 unique files composed of 19 bits. So we have the 'pidgeonhole problem' - our 1,048,576 files compress into 524,288 files. So when we extract our compressed files, we only get back half of the possible input files. This is a contradiction, and applies for any non-lossy compression algorithm - it's a basic consequence of information theory. Compression is very useful, and there's certainly room for improvement, but there's a lower limit - mathematics forbids us from being that clever.
Click to expand...
There are certainly ways of producing highly compressed archives, sometimes as high as the percentage in this case. They typically involve one of two things:

1.) Files whose contents have large amounts of redundant or repeating data
2.) Files whose contents have data that follows patterns that can be generated algorithmically

An example of #1 would be an XML document. XML documents are very easily compressible since there is a lot of repeated and redundant data.

An example of #2 is a bit harder to describe. In most cases, using information theory, it's possible to create algorithms that can reproduce huge sets of seemingly random data without loss. These algorithms can be stored in place of the actual data and take up a tiny fraction of the original data's space. So yes, it's possible to represent large amounts of data with far fewer bits than would be required if all you were doing was compressing that data.

But these algorithms only apply to certain kinds of data sets. It would be nearly impossible to create an algorithm that recreates the bits that make up MS Office.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
hey ive seen some whacky compression in my day - a fully opengl video thingy with 3d models, textures, effects and music, which was almost like a 3D mark benchy, but coming in at a measly 63kb !

but office down to 1.4 MB - BS!
 
Keeper said:
hey ive seen some whacky compression in my day - a fully opengl video thingy with 3d models, textures, effects and music, which was almost like a 3D mark benchy, but coming in at a measly 63kb !
Click to expand...

I've seen that, it was a 3D game with textures, sound and music, the lot, when you looked how much memory it used, it was about 500+MB. But it that case there were algorithms that generated all the content, it's not the content itself that was compressed.
 
qinglung said:
I've seen that, it was a 3D game with textures, sound and music, the lot, when you looked how much memory it used, it was about 500+MB. But it that case there were algorithms that generated all the content, it's not the content itself that was compressed.
Click to expand...

Its called kkrieger I think. It was about 99kb.
 
Well avast flagged it for starters. Probably a false positive though...(First one I've seen with avast). Then Avast killed a connection the app tried to make as a malware connection. Probably just the auto-update though.

Either way I'd suggest everyone approach this with a bit of caution.

I'm compressing Office07 right now...the prog reckon its going to take 5hours. Ratio @38% and falling.

Keeper said:
hey ive seen some whacky compression in my day - a fully opengl video thingy with 3d models, textures, effects and music, which was almost like a 3D mark benchy, but coming in at a measly 63kb !
Click to expand...
The OpenGL scene has size competitions. i.e. who can put the most awesomeness into 64kb/128kb etc. A lot of it was coded in assembler.

Modern programmer could learn something...
 
I tried the PAQ8 algorithm on a wmv file and ended up with the following. Uncompressed video file is 28.8MB and using zip cuts that down to about 27.7MB in less that 5secs. Using the PAQ8 algorithm in PeaZip (similar algorithm to KGB) it took 1.5hours, used 1.6GB RAM and compressed the file to 27.3MB.

Now I know that super compression depends on the entropy in the data and that video cannot be readily compressed by normal compression methods like rar and zip. But waiting a 1000% more for 0.014% improved compression ratio hardly seems worth it
 
Ghost02 said:
I'll believe it when teraside confirms
Click to expand...

Lol :p

The KGB site doesn't even load for me today. As the other posters mentioned, there is just no way this is possible.

Looking at the comparison/chart of compression on KGB's site last night, I saw a 3mb file with the best compression was only 700KB in size. That means, no matter how hard you try, you will never be able to make a 700-800mb file 1.4mb. Not with today's technology anyhow (personal computers).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X