Hi, I don't have actual data to show upfront, but decompression runs in CPU, whereas reading from disk is a slower operation. There would be a trade-off between those two, but you could end-up with a case where UPX-ed is even faster than non-UPX-ed.
Aitor El mié, 22 jul 2026 a las 23:15, Jim Hall via Freedos-devel (< [email protected]>) escribió: > On Wed, Jul 22, 2026 at 3:24 PM Eric Auer wrote: > > > [..] > > > > > > IA16-GCC: 19728 Bytes (19 kiB) > > > Watcom: 20544 Bytes (20 kiB) > > > Turbo C++: 17510 Bytes (17 kiB) > > > > How about the UPX-UCL compressed size differences, by the way? > > > > > I've always wondered about the performance impact of UPX, but haven't > really explored it. Maybe someone else has. I get that a UPX'd EXE > will be smaller -- but don't you also get a performance hit every time > you run the program, because the EXE needs to be decompressed before > it can run? > > Maybe that's not a big deal for a larger "desktop" app like a > spreadsheet or editor or word processor, but is UPX "worth it" for > common tools that you run all the time? > > > _______________________________________________ > Freedos-devel mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel >
_______________________________________________ Freedos-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
