helloworld45 Posted October 16, 2005 Report Posted October 16, 2005 disreguarding system resource usage, how pretty it looks, how "safe" it is, and all other biases, which DOWNLOADS FASTER? Azureus or utorrent?Just to reitterate incase any of you miss the point of this thread, DOWNLOAD SPEED is all im concerned with.edit: Please refrain from posting unless you have used both.
Determination Posted October 16, 2005 Report Posted October 16, 2005 µTorrent has me reaching speeds that I could never reach using other clients... and the way I think of it: the speed is just a bonus - the size / memory / cpu is why I use it.
helloworld45 Posted October 16, 2005 Author Report Posted October 16, 2005 1st post after 22 views, THANK YOU DETERMINATION
linx05 Posted October 16, 2005 Report Posted October 16, 2005 I still can't get great, stable speeds from utorrent. It always jumps around, doesn't seem to download all the seeders, leechers. I'm sure there is a reason for the last one, I just haven't searched it.
BloodStaindHurricane Posted October 16, 2005 Report Posted October 16, 2005 I've gotten the same or similar speeds with both, so I wont vote, if we're talking only speed. I started using utorrent b/c of how lightweight and dependable it can be at the same time.
erissiva Posted October 16, 2005 Report Posted October 16, 2005 I've noticed faster speeds with uTorrent lately.I've used both of these clients and also BitComet.
helloworld45 Posted October 16, 2005 Author Report Posted October 16, 2005 wow, utorrent takes an enormous lead
mcgr75 Posted October 16, 2005 Report Posted October 16, 2005 i have been getting download speeds of over 250 kB/s with utorrent, never get above 100 with Azereus. Plus Utorrent is so tiny in terms of resources, FANTASTIC
Martin Posted October 16, 2005 Report Posted October 16, 2005 Since when did the download speed depend on the client?
randomint Posted October 16, 2005 Report Posted October 16, 2005 (i think there should be a few more options when you say "fastest")anyway, i found that BitTornado is faster than Azureus on my system, and BitComet is faster than BitTornadobetween BitComet and uTorrent, i can't decide, sometimes one is faster while the other is faster another timeso if comparing Azureus and uTorrent, uTorrent is definitely faster
ColdArmor Posted October 16, 2005 Report Posted October 16, 2005 uTorrent - I am getting much more stable speeds.
ScubaSteve Posted October 16, 2005 Report Posted October 16, 2005 ive had pretty much identical download speeds on both clients.
Ultima Posted October 16, 2005 Report Posted October 16, 2005 I've seen someone else use Azureus, and it is actually blazing fast, so it's really hard to compare download/upload speeds. Between the two, though, I'd choose µTorrent because of the resource usage. I didn't vote since neither is faster than the other (to me at least).
BlackLion Posted October 16, 2005 Report Posted October 16, 2005 They are about the same for me, Actually they perform quite similarly for me, except for the tremendous difference in resource usage. uTorrent for teh win!
nunpoom Posted October 16, 2005 Report Posted October 16, 2005 Hmm... I voted for utorrent just for the heck of it.But really, utorrent seem to do things faster than ALL other clients out there.-Peace-
crowman Posted October 16, 2005 Report Posted October 16, 2005 I am fairly new to utorrent, and switched for system resource reasons. I voted for azureus as I have yet to see speeds in utorrent that match speeds from azureus. It is close and don't mind waiting a while longer or seeding more if program is not noticeable in background.
BlackLion Posted October 16, 2005 Report Posted October 16, 2005 I am fairly new to utorrent, and switched for system resource reasons. I voted for azureus as I have yet to see speeds in utorrent that match speeds from azureus. It is close and don't mind waiting a while longer or seeding more if program is not noticeable in background.What I am thinking is that is a 'tweakage' issue and as the client matures (and it is doing that rapidly) we will see that change. I sometimes grab files with slow boxes ( I still have a 400 and 466 Celerys floating around) and this is perfect for them. I dont necessarily want the files fast I just want them period and my workstations are busy so I dont want to tie them up with torrents. I couldnt ask any more or better. If they never did anything else to this client unless the torrent climate changed drastically or some incredible new client came along I would use this just for those boxes alone.
uTP Posted October 16, 2005 Report Posted October 16, 2005 µtorrent is on my PC's definitly faster, about 50%minimum up to more than 100% O_o that's great. i think azureus is overloaded and wasted so the systme resources instead of getting good download rates.
appus Posted October 16, 2005 Report Posted October 16, 2005 speed wise.. i dont see much difference.. always uploads 150-175 kBps.. same now too....system resources.. Thumbs up
erissiva Posted October 16, 2005 Report Posted October 16, 2005 Since when did the download speed depend on the client?Depends on the protocols that the client uses and the way it connects to other clients. That's how.
Martin Posted October 16, 2005 Report Posted October 16, 2005 The protocols the client uses? Aren't we talking about BitTorrent clients?
Moody Posted October 16, 2005 Report Posted October 16, 2005 Surely, the speed of the download has more to do with Seed to Peer ratio than client-- Moody
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.