Replies: 3 comments 2 replies
-
In the Binary Contents compare method, single threading was faster in my environment, so I made it single threaded. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
No, none. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
I repeated the test with a subset of the files from first test (now I have about 2x10 GB of files in two folders that I compare, it was 2x100GB in first test) and now I get different results. Binary Content is fastest:
Strange... |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
When comparing two folders I noticed that the default "Full Contents" method is about twice as fast the "Binary Contents" method, even if the docs say: This method is faster than the Quick contents compare method (which in turn is: This method is faster than Full Contents, because it does not load the files.)
The reason is probably that the former use multiple CPU cores/threads, while the binary mode uses one.
For binary contents method Task manager shows almost no load on my SSD, while about 33% load on the CPU (i7-9850H 6core/12thread) - mostly by MsMpEng.exe
Some quick benchmarks (comparing two big folders, that happen to be identical):
Is there a reason for not using multiple threads for binary contents method? It may not give more speed on HDD, but today we use SSD. Also with a lot of RAM, there is a good chance the files are in cache, even when using a HDD.
PS: I used WinMergePortable-2.16.30 64 bit version
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions