Bittorent Client Recommendations
Bittorent Client Recommendations
Hey,
I just added this post to AsianblueX's thread to give some links to the clients in the poll.
Just vote for the client you use mostly. I hope this will give the undecided members here an idea which clients are good.
ABC: written in Python, based on BitTornado v0.2.0, inactive[/i] (last release: v3.1 10-02-2005)
Azureus/Vuze: re-written in Java, client with most features, supports also "Trackerless Bittorrent"
BitTornado: Python, extended version of the official BT client, inactive (last release: v0.3.18 12/23/2006)
BitComet: rewritten in C++, supports all modern features
BT++: Python, based on the official BT client, inactive (last release: v0.5.4 2003-05-07)
Nova Torrent: Python, inactive (last release: v0.3.4 10/25/2003)
Official BT client: Python, latest releases support also "Trackerless Bittorrent"
TorrentStorm: Python, based on TheSHAD0W's experimental BT client, inactive (last release: v1.3 ~2006)
Shareaza: C++ multi-protocol client, supports networks like eDonkey2000, Bittorrent, Gnutella, ...
eXeem: semi-decentralized P2P network which uses the bittorrent protocol (a.k.a. "Trackerless Bittorrent"), eXeem network was shutdown in 2005
µTorrent: C++ µTorrent was designed to use as little cpu, memory and space as possible while offering all the functionality expected from advanced clients.
Transmission: C / Objective C modern BT client for MacOS, UN*X, Windows
Update 2012:
Modern clients support DHT (trackerless protocol), Magnet links, Multi-tracker support, Peer exchange (PEX), UDP tracker protocol, etc.
Recommended clients are: µTorrent, Azureus/Vuze, Official BT client, Bitcomet, Transmission
For more information read Wikipedia:BitTorrent and Wikipedia:Comparison of BitTorrent clients
.
I just added this post to AsianblueX's thread to give some links to the clients in the poll.
Just vote for the client you use mostly. I hope this will give the undecided members here an idea which clients are good.
ABC: written in Python, based on BitTornado v0.2.0, inactive[/i] (last release: v3.1 10-02-2005)
Azureus/Vuze: re-written in Java, client with most features, supports also "Trackerless Bittorrent"
BitTornado: Python, extended version of the official BT client, inactive (last release: v0.3.18 12/23/2006)
BitComet: rewritten in C++, supports all modern features
BT++: Python, based on the official BT client, inactive (last release: v0.5.4 2003-05-07)
Nova Torrent: Python, inactive (last release: v0.3.4 10/25/2003)
Official BT client: Python, latest releases support also "Trackerless Bittorrent"
TorrentStorm: Python, based on TheSHAD0W's experimental BT client, inactive (last release: v1.3 ~2006)
Shareaza: C++ multi-protocol client, supports networks like eDonkey2000, Bittorrent, Gnutella, ...
eXeem: semi-decentralized P2P network which uses the bittorrent protocol (a.k.a. "Trackerless Bittorrent"), eXeem network was shutdown in 2005
µTorrent: C++ µTorrent was designed to use as little cpu, memory and space as possible while offering all the functionality expected from advanced clients.
Transmission: C / Objective C modern BT client for MacOS, UN*X, Windows
Update 2012:
Modern clients support DHT (trackerless protocol), Magnet links, Multi-tracker support, Peer exchange (PEX), UDP tracker protocol, etc.
Recommended clients are: µTorrent, Azureus/Vuze, Official BT client, Bitcomet, Transmission
For more information read Wikipedia:BitTorrent and Wikipedia:Comparison of BitTorrent clients
.
Last edited by MoerkJ on Sep 25th, '12, 19:26, edited 9 times in total.
- AsianblueX
- Posts: 138
- Joined: May 7th, '04, 13:43
- Location: San Diego
-
- Global Moderator
- Posts: 1825
- Joined: Oct 19th, '04, 02:22
- Location: NYC
- Contact:
-
- Posts: 1
- Joined: Nov 6th, '04, 14:26
- Location: NZ
-
- Global Moderator
- Posts: 1825
- Joined: Oct 19th, '04, 02:22
- Location: NYC
- Contact:
yadirs: nopes, you can download a batch torrent using ABC. i do that all the time. you just have to copy the batch torrent url and paste it on the blank box and click on "add link". i download batch torrents all the time...from anime to drama~Yadirs wrote:Me too.Yomy Chan wrote:I Use ABC , I didn't try another client ..because I think this one is the best
But note that to download a single file from a batch torrent you can't use ABC, you have to use BitTornado.
-
- Posts: 96
- Joined: Oct 1st, '04, 03:15
- Location: Canada
I started using the official client. Gave up when I found that each instance uses separate memory; each one takes up 20-30 MB, so running 8 or so, my system starts to swap (with 512 MB memory).
Went to BitTornado. More options, but each download is on its own window, so it's just as hard to track (even when I spread the windows across 4 virtual desktops).
Went to ABC. Was good, but couldn't handle (selective) batch download. Realized the importance of a global upload rate -- so that I can still surf net smoothly!
Tried G3 then. Wow, even showed the parts missing (not that it helps the download). It's perfect, except for three things:
1. GUI is slightly sluggish; uses too much CPU (30-40% for my P-III 850 MHz)
2. Resume needs to hash-check
3. Resume will move the torrent to the front of the queue (messing my order)
Went to BitComet. Love it! Even supports Chinese characters. A few things that make it better than the other clients:
1. GUI is fast; CPU usage is low (10-20%)
2. Pause/Resume doesn't need to hash-check
3. Have disk cache, so fewer writes to disk
4. UPnP, so no need to manually configure port forwarding
BitComet is more memory efficient. When I run G3, my system cache is over 300 MB (out of 512 MB). When I run BitComet, it is under 100 MB.
BitComet is not perfect, however. I've encountered several minor bugs, but I can live with them.
Went to BitTornado. More options, but each download is on its own window, so it's just as hard to track (even when I spread the windows across 4 virtual desktops).
Went to ABC. Was good, but couldn't handle (selective) batch download. Realized the importance of a global upload rate -- so that I can still surf net smoothly!
Tried G3 then. Wow, even showed the parts missing (not that it helps the download). It's perfect, except for three things:
1. GUI is slightly sluggish; uses too much CPU (30-40% for my P-III 850 MHz)
2. Resume needs to hash-check
3. Resume will move the torrent to the front of the queue (messing my order)
Went to BitComet. Love it! Even supports Chinese characters. A few things that make it better than the other clients:
1. GUI is fast; CPU usage is low (10-20%)
2. Pause/Resume doesn't need to hash-check
3. Have disk cache, so fewer writes to disk
4. UPnP, so no need to manually configure port forwarding
BitComet is more memory efficient. When I run G3, my system cache is over 300 MB (out of 512 MB). When I run BitComet, it is under 100 MB.
BitComet is not perfect, however. I've encountered several minor bugs, but I can live with them.
-
- Posts: 9
- Joined: Dec 22nd, '04, 14:19
- Location: los angeles
-
- Posts: 12
- Joined: Jun 3rd, '04, 08:39
I switched from Bittornado to BitComet 2 days ago.
With bitcomet i get low cpu usage and my downloads does'nt stuck at 99%, one thing i hate about bitcomet is the global upload thingy not working for me i set at 75kbs and it uploads at 100kbs thats my max upload speed... i'm using the latest beta (unstable) maybe thats the problem.
i'll keep it for a while and see if i can get dl speed of 860kbs or more, thats what i get sometimes with bittornado. Right now the max speed that i'm geting from bitcomet is just a little above 100kbs.
With bitcomet i get low cpu usage and my downloads does'nt stuck at 99%, one thing i hate about bitcomet is the global upload thingy not working for me i set at 75kbs and it uploads at 100kbs thats my max upload speed... i'm using the latest beta (unstable) maybe thats the problem.
i'll keep it for a while and see if i can get dl speed of 860kbs or more, thats what i get sometimes with bittornado. Right now the max speed that i'm geting from bitcomet is just a little above 100kbs.
I use ABC and have been for a long time
I have tried a lot of others, but always come back to ABC. It may not be the fastest out there, but it keeps me sane. I have an easier time staying organized. It is simple and always works. I run netlimiter with it and keep my ABC upload speed choked to about 75-80% of my upload bandwidth. That way I can surf the net and get a decent download rate.
It has been since July since they had the last version. I hope to see a newer, improved version soon!
I have tried a lot of others, but always come back to ABC. It may not be the fastest out there, but it keeps me sane. I have an easier time staying organized. It is simple and always works. I run netlimiter with it and keep my ABC upload speed choked to about 75-80% of my upload bandwidth. That way I can surf the net and get a decent download rate.
It has been since July since they had the last version. I hope to see a newer, improved version soon!
Me too started with official client than switch to Bit Tornado0.3.7 and have been using it till todate. My speed is decent & it has not given me any problem so far, thus I'm not upgrading it to 0.3.8 Thinking of trying Bit Comet, heard that its good too and after the informative input from nhyone & decaturguy I'll probably give it a try. TQ.
-
- Posts: 29
- Joined: Dec 29th, '04, 04:47
- Location: Canada
I've used pretty much every one out there at one time or another. Still end up coming back to Azureus though. For the rare tracker that won't take Az, and for my seed uploads, I've used G3 most of the time, usually when I want to allocate most of my u/l bandwidth to my seed file while not killing my d/l speeds too much. Sounds weird, but it works!
-
- Posts: 5
- Joined: Dec 27th, '04, 09:21
This question is like comparing apples and oranges. ABC is basically BitTornado with a queueing system on top. What do you expect and how do you want to compare two clients for two different purposes? The only way to nearly be able to make a comparision would be to let ABC run with only one torrent in the queue. Does that make sense? ... not to me.jholic wrote:MoerkJ: asking for a second opinion here. which client do you think takes more memory? abc? or btornado?
Sigh, I feel so stupid because you make me actually look and compare these two...
My ABC with 10 active torrents (about 40 queued) uses 32MB, usually something like 30-35MB.. maybe 40MB if I let it running for some weeks. One BitTornado client uses 24MB, two BitTornado clients use 2*24MB=48MB, etc... The difference is obviously that every BitTornado client loads the Python code into the memory where ABC loads Python only once for all torrents. Conclusion: using a client with a queuing system is more efficient than using two single clients.
edit: I tested on a PIII 600MHz with Windows2000 and more than enough free memory (287 of 864MB used).
I've used all of those at one point. Let's see when I first discovered bt, I used the official one cause I thought that would be the best. Little did I know. You have to open separate clients for each. Waste of my taskbar and memory. Bit tornado is the same way but it looks slightly better. Didn't like nova. Then, I discovered ABC. I liked it a lot and thought I was going to use it forever then I switched to TorrentStorm. I am a HUGE fan of that. I love everything about it. The downside to both ABC and TorrentStorm is that they always seem to make my computer crash after awhile. Notice how everytime I get low speeds I switch to a different client. Then, I started to get really low speeds and I had no choice but to switch to another client. Also because I got linux so I started to use Azureus. It's ok. I like it a lot but that java is unstable.
I've always gotten extremely low speeds with those chinese torrents so I decided to use BitComet and I am really lovin' it! It's really fast on those chinese torrents but I have to say not so much on other stuff. But then again, that depends on other stuff too. That client gave me speeds I have never even imagined before. I used to get 60-80kbps on good days but on BitComet my good days are 400+!! My computer hasn't really crashed with that program either. Although, I notice myself having a hard time connecting to the internet. The only reason I don't like BitComet is because uploading is really slow which I hate. But, that's really nothing to complain about. I just use Azureus to seed. So, I really urge everyone to try that one out. It's really give you less headaches.
I've always gotten extremely low speeds with those chinese torrents so I decided to use BitComet and I am really lovin' it! It's really fast on those chinese torrents but I have to say not so much on other stuff. But then again, that depends on other stuff too. That client gave me speeds I have never even imagined before. I used to get 60-80kbps on good days but on BitComet my good days are 400+!! My computer hasn't really crashed with that program either. Although, I notice myself having a hard time connecting to the internet. The only reason I don't like BitComet is because uploading is really slow which I hate. But, that's really nothing to complain about. I just use Azureus to seed. So, I really urge everyone to try that one out. It's really give you less headaches.
I use ABC and I am very, very into the queuing system. I also like when you minimize it the window is hidden. I hate messy taskbars =/ I think that's what prompted me to ditch the original bittorrent client. I have tried downloading other clients but their interface confuses me Gosh, I'm a dummy. Anyway, ABC is definitely user-friendly for the puter ratarded (like me).
- kali4niaguy
- Posts: 165
- Joined: Sep 28th, '04, 19:00
- Location: :D
i've tried ABC, BitTornado, orginal BT, and BitComet.
on my laptop, i use BitTornado. i tried Comet and ABC, but the dl speeds were slow compared to Tornado so i switched back to Tornado.
on the desktop, i 1st used BitTornado, but the pc crashed so much i switched to something else. i tried ABC, since u can load all the torrents u want to dl at once, and que the 1s u want to dl later, it's perfect for the crashing pc bcuz i just set it so ABC starts up automatically after crashing! i would've tried out Comet on this, but i didn't like it when i tried it on the laptop. i should try out some of the others.
i wish i had the dl speeds some of u ppl r talking about though, i would party hardy if i get 50kb/s consistantly. shitty comcast cable, always disconnecting me when i leave my dl's on overnite.
on my laptop, i use BitTornado. i tried Comet and ABC, but the dl speeds were slow compared to Tornado so i switched back to Tornado.
on the desktop, i 1st used BitTornado, but the pc crashed so much i switched to something else. i tried ABC, since u can load all the torrents u want to dl at once, and que the 1s u want to dl later, it's perfect for the crashing pc bcuz i just set it so ABC starts up automatically after crashing! i would've tried out Comet on this, but i didn't like it when i tried it on the laptop. i should try out some of the others.
i wish i had the dl speeds some of u ppl r talking about though, i would party hardy if i get 50kb/s consistantly. shitty comcast cable, always disconnecting me when i leave my dl's on overnite.
Whew, I thought that happened only to me. Anyways, I really think you should give bitcomet another try. I used to not even be able to reach 50 either but the trick is to set the ul speed really low like 3-5 and the dl will go very high.kali4niaguy wrote: always disconnecting me when i leave my dl's on overnite.
So many abc users! I really like torrentstorm, its one of the best ones out there. Torrentstorm users where are you?
-
- Posts: 3
- Joined: Dec 28th, '04, 05:13
- Location: Hawaii
Wow! 400k/s?? That's unheard of for me...makes me want to try another client for sure. Right now I'm using Shadow's BitToranado...changed from the original Bittorrent. Maybe it's time to try something new and learn my ABC's
Is it my service (TimeWarner Cable) or is it something else (client) that's limiting my Upload rate to max 42kb/sec cumulative at any given time? Just wondering cuz it's not so with downloading...
Is it my service (TimeWarner Cable) or is it something else (client) that's limiting my Upload rate to max 42kb/sec cumulative at any given time? Just wondering cuz it's not so with downloading...
The switch!
I just made the switch from ABC to Bitcomet. ABC served me well for months, but recently it had been stalling about every five minutes. I read some things indicating that it may have been caused by Zone Alarm or something... At any rate, I have been using Bitcomet for a couple of days now and it is working wonderfully. The GUI is more interesting, and it feels as though it uses less system resources than ABC as well.
azureus gives me a lot of control over the torrents. i can set the upload and download speed for each torrent. very important when i want to upload a few torrents but need to prioritize just one. i get to prioritize that specific torrent by setting its ul limit higher, and the others lower. i can also prioritize the leecher whom i'm seeding to. like when someone is almost finished with the file, but all my upload goes to others with less than 50% of the file (we all knw how frustrating to be stuck at 99% bt cnt get faster dl) i dedicate most of my ul speed to whoever is almost done with the file. that way there will be another seeder sooner. it's a risk to prioritize that leecher though.. cos many times, especially on top torrents needing seeds, they leave right after finishing the file.
i jst checked out bitcomet... but all i can find is a global ul/dl.. tried to download a torrent, bt it was taking too long to connect.
i jst checked out bitcomet... but all i can find is a global ul/dl.. tried to download a torrent, bt it was taking too long to connect.
-
- Posts: 5
- Joined: Jan 19th, '05, 18:53
apples: On bitcomet you have a priority setting and you can set up and down limit for every task... right click on the torrent in the downloadlist -> "task properties" -> "advance" tab
Personnaly been quite happy with bitcomet... well didn't test azureus for very long... seems like a nice client but use more ressource than bitcomet... :/
Personnaly been quite happy with bitcomet... well didn't test azureus for very long... seems like a nice client but use more ressource than bitcomet... :/
- blakmetalik
- Posts: 26
- Joined: Oct 2nd, '04, 22:44
- Location: Maryland
BT Client CPU Usage
When I run multiple torrent DL my CPU always slow down/freeze. I am thinking of changing to another client from BToranado. Do any of you guys know the CPU usage of BTornado, BitComet and bunch of other clients? I have browse though a couple of forums as well as d-addicts thread and still cant find the answer. Thanks alot.
-
- Posts: 4
- Joined: Nov 16th, '04, 21:18
- Location: Sweden
Re: BT Client CPU Usage
hmm well i only use Azureus and as for CPU usage it takes up a LOTxiaryx wrote:When I run multiple torrent DL my CPU always slow down/freeze. I am thinking of changing to another client from BToranado. Do any of you guys know the CPU usage of BTornado, BitComet and bunch of other clients? I have browse though a couple of forums as well as d-addicts thread and still cant find the answer. Thanks alot.
thing is i think most bittorrent clients take up a lot of CPU and the more torrents it has going the more CPU its gonna need. one time i had eight torrents running and it took like a minute just to start up an mp3 ;)
anywayz there is always the standard bittorrent client:
http://bittorrent.com/download.html
even if it's quite nonadvanced compared to all the others but i think it takes upp less CPU or something
- nihonfreak
- Posts: 5
- Joined: Jan 6th, '05, 21:57
- Location: Puerto Montt, Chile
Re: BT Client CPU Usage
my cpu too, 4 downloads at the same time and you can´t do anything (i use azureus)BerugasLabor wrote:hmm well i only use Azureus and as for CPU usage it takes up a LOTxiaryx wrote:When I run multiple torrent DL my CPU always slow down/freeze. I am thinking of changing to another client from BToranado. Do any of you guys know the CPU usage of BTornado, BitComet and bunch of other clients? I have browse though a couple of forums as well as d-addicts thread and still cant find the answer. Thanks alot.
thing is i think most bittorrent clients take up a lot of CPU and the more torrents it has going the more CPU its gonna need. one time i had eight torrents running and it took like a minute just to start up an mp3 ;)
anywayz there is always the standard bittorrent client:
http://bittorrent.com/download.html
even if it's quite nonadvanced compared to all the others but i think it takes upp less CPU or something
I have tried Azureus, and it just sucked up resources like crazy.... BTornado is good until it is >6. There were alot of praises about Bitcomet, but does it use less resource than BTornado? Hmm.. I think for relative comparison between clients, my processor shouldnt be too much of an issue no? But it is Pentium III 512 ram. Thanks guys for your inputs.
Well, I've tried every client I could find out there, and for overall ease of use and performance, I've found Azureus to be the best one for me. I often run 8-12 torrents at once, and rarely does my cpu usage get above 5% or so, unless it's allocating file space for new torrents or rechecking downloads. This is on my p4 2.8 ghz system with a gig of ram and a scary # of hard drives.
Bitcomet or the G3 client would be my alternate choices. I often run G3 on one machine for seeding and Azureus on my server for downloads. They seem to play better that way.
Bitcomet or the G3 client would be my alternate choices. I often run G3 on one machine for seeding and Azureus on my server for downloads. They seem to play better that way.
Hmm... if cpu usage is your only concern, then you might be better off with the G3 client. It's written in Python, and doesn't seem to use much in the way of resources. Bitcomet has always used up a bit more clock cycles than Azureus, but it also has to do with the way your system's configured.
I've noticed that most performance hits on my system occurred when the client was refreshing or checking the tracker. Guess it makes sense that the more connections you have, the more resources will be used to maintain them. Frankly, I didn't see a bit of difference in performance when I bumped my d/l system from 512 to 1 gig of ram.
I've noticed that most performance hits on my system occurred when the client was refreshing or checking the tracker. Guess it makes sense that the more connections you have, the more resources will be used to maintain them. Frankly, I didn't see a bit of difference in performance when I bumped my d/l system from 512 to 1 gig of ram.
- nihonfreak
- Posts: 5
- Joined: Jan 6th, '05, 21:57
- Location: Puerto Montt, Chile
xiaryx: i believe as sokeen put it, you probably need more ram. i have nearly the exact same system as aNToK, but with less ram. i also use btornado, and i rarely have problems with memory. BUT i almost never go above 4 windows. i don't have enough bandwidth to do that.
the other client i hear that may use less memory is abc. but no one has said anything about that yet.
the other client i hear that may use less memory is abc. but no one has said anything about that yet.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests