• Announcements

    • xper

      MSFN Sponsorship and AdBlockers!   07/10/2016

      Dear members, MSFN is made available via subscriptions, donations and advertising revenue. The use of ad-blocking software hurts the site. Please disable ad-blocking software or set an exception for MSFN. Alternatively, become a site sponsor and ads will be disabled automatically and by subscribing you get other sponsor benefits.
tomasz86

Expand.exe vs Cabarc.exe - extracting files

7 posts in this topic

I was wondering if there's any difference in speed when extracting files using expand.exe and cabarc.exe so I've just done a simple test. I took all *.*_ files from XP SP3 (2674 files total), put them into a folder called "1" and then expanded all of them into a new folder called "2".


  1. EXPAND -R 1\* 2\ >NUL


    Time: 0:42


  2. FOR /F "delims=" %%A IN ('DIR/B/S 1') DO cabarc x "%%A" 2\ >NUL


    Time: 0:33


  3. FOR /F "delims=" %%A IN ('DIR/B/S 1') DO EXPAND -R "%%A" 2\ >NUL


    Time: 6:08

Cabarc.exe is almost 25% faster than Expand.exe when used like in 1. and 2. but if you use Expand.exe in a loop like 3. then it's time to switch to Cabarc.exe since the difference in speed is huge.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From what you show above, I don't see any situation where using Expand is faster than Cabarc.

I wonder if there are any speed improvements over here when using the versions that include an "-r" option, vs using a FOR loop, when that capability is required.

Cheers and Regards

Edited by bphlpt
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wanted to say that Cabarc is always faster but the difference isn't that dramatic in case of 1. and 2. On the other hand, 2. is MUCH faster than 3.

Edited by tomasz86
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And how would 7-zip compare? :unsure:

jaclaz

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

7-Zip


  1. 7z.exe x 1\* -o"2" >NUL


    Time: 0:24


  2. FOR /F "delims=" %%A IN ('DIR/B/S 1') DO 7z.exe x "%%A" -o"2" >NUL


    Time: 1:08

Edited by tomasz86
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Strange results. :unsure:

I mean it is obvious that going through a FOR /F loop in batch should eat some time, but while 7-zip (as expected ;)) is prolly faster than both EXPAND and CABARC, when using the wildcard specification, it is greatly slower through the loop.

This should mean that *somehow* 7-zip is very "slow" at initializing or that cabarc (that you have necessarily timed only in the FOR loop) is d@mn fast at it.

Which version of cabarc.exe did you test ?

There could be some differences, I have an oldish:

Microsoft ® Cabinet Tool - Version 1.00.0601 (03/18/97) <- 114.688 byte

And:

Microsoft ® Cabinet Tool - Version 5.00.2134.1 <- 65.808 byte

Microsoft ® Cabinet Tool - Version 5.1.2600.0 <- 62.976 byte

Same goes for Expand.exe and for 7-zip (actually I think there are probably more versions of it that stars in the sky)

But can you try also 7za.exe?

I suspect that the extra time is because 7z is not "standalone" whilost 7za is :blink:

BTW (and as a side note) 7zip may have (actually has) issues with CASE of filenames.

jaclaz

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It was cabarc.exe 6.2.9200.16438 (from Windows 8), expand.exe 6.1.7600.16385 from Windows 7 and 7z.exe 9.20.0.0. All tests were conducted in Windows 2000.

I'll try to check other versions later.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.