Best Free BitTorrent Client

 
In a Hurry?
  Go straight to the Quick Selection Guide
 
Introduction

Since its inauspicious public appearance just under 12 years ago  bittorrent has become one of the major download formats. With good reason too: it's fast, equitable and efficient. For the downloader, bittorrent offers an uncorrupted copy of the original with the option to stop the download at any time and re-start from where the download left off (very useful for those on shaky internet connections)
f you haven't yet installed a Bittorrent client on your PC, you should as there are some great freeware clients available.   In Bittorrent the best clients are free.  (In fact, if a client costs money, it is most likely a scam).

This article is part of a series of articles on bittorrent here at Gizmo's Freeware.  If you are not familiar with bittorrent, then before using this article you should read this:

There are setup guides here at Gizmo's Freeware for each of these suggested free bittorrent clients.  Links to the guides are with the product description in the Quick Selection Guide at the end of the review.

This review was prepared on February 8, 2013, and the testing was conducted in the two weeks before that date and used the latest versions of the clients at that time.

Testing

Anyone with knowledge of bittorrent knows that it is nearly impossible to have a testing procedure that is foolproof in measuring small differentials in speed among bittorrent clients.  This is due to the fact that your download speed depends on the upload of other active users and there is no control over their actions while testing.  However, I have been testing clients for this category for several years and am convinced that the better clients can be separated from the others.

There were 7 rounds of testing to boil down the 17 clients tested to the 7 in the review.    Six torrents and three magnet links were used in this part of the testing.  I then conducted several tests in two rounds of testing to determine the Top Pick.  I did post pdf copies of my notes for each round of testing:  Bittorrent Testing 2013 Notes

All of the clients listed in the review had excellent performance on all of the testing, so all are superior bittorrent clients.  The speed performance on the testing was a factor.  Even though the speed differences were small, some consistently performed slightly better.  Features and support were also factors.  CPU and RAM mattered in that a client without many features that had high CPU or RAM use would fall to one with low CPU/RAM use.  Toolbars and addons in the installation process were a slight factor.

Testing was performed on Windows 7 64bit.

About Me

I am not a technical expert, but I  have been using bittorrent since 2003.  Before coming to Gizmo's I was the Administrator at a general bittorrent forum site, giving assistance on a variety of clients, and a moderator at the Vuze fora.  I still view a number of bittorrent fora and the fora of the various bittorrent clients.  This gives me a good idea of what the average user is looking for in a bittorrent client.

Ranking

All of these clients have the basic bittorrent features like DHT, PEX, encryption and UPnP. 

All seven of the bittorrent clients listed here performed excellently on all test torrents.  Speed and performance was a factor, but features and support facilities were major considerations.  A clean installation (without toolbars or ads) was a plus.

Most people just want a client to download torrents, but there are some features that a number of users like to use, such as a built in IP Filter, use of RSS feeds, proxy support, a scheduler and a web interface.

I will make note of those that have installs or other changes to your system that are not necessary for the proper function of the bittorrent client.   I strongly suggest that if you choose a bittorrent client that has these unnecessary add ons, to not accept those changes or add ons.  I have put up guides to help with the installation of the three clients that have these unnecessary steps in the installation process.

 
Discussion

 All seven of these clients performed excellently on all the test torrents and any one of them will meet your needs as a bittorrent client.  There was some slight download speed differentials, but nothing too significant.

tixati-main-screen-thumbTixati is the top pick this year as it runs fast, offers a lot of information and has the most appealing interface in a very efficient package, RAM and CPU wise. 
Tixati always seems to be in active development and the developers are receptive to users input.  The wide variety of layout options are indicative of their responsiveness to users.  Tixati has all the features that an average user wants.
Their help facilities have grown, but have gotten a bit out of date..  Their forums are responsive,
I was surprised to find that Tixati does not support web seeds.  Generally not an issue, but there will be an issue with the 3 million torrents at Archive.org as many of those are seeded by web seeds. 
Many users will like the colored display and the many options for display as well as the vast amount of information offered within a program that uses relatively little system resources.  The clean install will appeal to all.

Pros:  Stable and efficient with a good variety of options.  Developers are active and responsive to user requests.  Attractive interface.  Good help resources.  Clean install.

Cons:   Help resource, though very good, could use some updates.  No support for web seeds.

qbittorrent-main-screen-thumbqBittorrent is the choice for those users that just want to download torrents and are not interested in graphs, extra information and display.  qBittorrent tested slightly faster on the test torrents consistently.  Its RAM and CPU use make it the most efficient client here.
It has all the features that an ordinary user would want. Their built in search runs quick and has a good number of sites included at default.  I am usually not a big fan of built in searches, but this one is superior to the rest.  Plugins for additional sites are available.   
The Wiki  has improved, but is not among the best..  The situation at the forums is good.   Response at their bugs page is excellent and the responses are from the developer.  
qBittorrent has been the Top Pick here at TSA for a few years and was only a sliver behind Tixati this year.  This is an excellent client that is fast with all the features an average user needs with small CPU and RAM use and a clean install.

 Pros:  Low and stable RAM and CPU with all the necessary features.  Fastest performance on torrents.  Development still seems to be very active and responsive to users.  Clean install, no addons etc.  Cross platform client.

Cons:  Support has improved, but could be better.   Not that well known and not accepted at many private torrent sites (though the situation is improving).

These next three clients include the Spigot Toolbar along with home page and search engine changes in their installation.  The Spigot toolbar is considered malware by many and their site has a red (high risk) warning from WOT.  2 also have Open Candy software suggestions during install and 1 has software suggestions that may be Open Candy, but I cannot confirm. 

I suggest that you decline all such offers.  Since I have seen so many users complain of the toolbars and changes taking effect after installation, I have put up installation guides (see Quick Selection Guide)  to help avoid these unnecessary extras,

I had considered removing these three from the suggested list because of the Spigot toolbar.  However, since I am going to start re-testing (and re-writing this review) soon, I will leave as is for now.

I strongly suggest that you use one of the other 4 clients suggested here.

vuze-main-screen-thumbVuze  is a good choice for those users that utilize a VPN or proxy, due to its options that can stop all activity off the VPN or proxy (useful if the VPN/Proxy goes down) and its option to disable IPv6 support (for VPNs that have an IPv6 leak.
Vuze is still an excellent client with a wide variety of plugins  and options and information.   They were the first bittorrent client to add streaming capabiities.
Their help resources (Vuze-Wiki and Vuze forums) have taken a step back, but the Wiki is still an excellent source of information and the fora does provide decent support. 
Although the client has improved its RAM use greatly since the Azureus model, it still is the big RAM user here, though this is really not an issue in this day and age.
Their install includes a toolbar and home and search page changes enabled at default.  There is also a software install offered  and it also has advertisements in the Vuze portion of the client (can be avoided by  using the "Classic" interface).
Many users like the intricate details this program provides, its streaming capabilities and its VPN and Proxy support is superior to other bittorrent clients.

Pros: There is a wide variety of options and information within the program and an impressive array of plugins to satisfy any need.  Support for VPN  and Proxy use is superior.   Streaming capability.  Cross platform. 

Cons:  Toolbar install and home page change enabled at default on install.  Advertisements within free version of Vuze interface (can be avoided by using Classic interface).  Highest RAM use of the clients here. Spigot toolbar offered during install along with home page and search engine changes.  Software offers similar to Open Candy.

utorrent-main-screen-thumbµTorrent has been top pick here in the past and is still a superior bittorrent client.
With the excellent results on the test torrents, the fact that it is a stable and low resource using client and the vast amount of features packed into this tiny program, this is a top flight bittorrent program.  
The support provided by  µTorrent's FAQs, guides and forums is excellent, though it has diminished a bit from past years. 
Streaming to devices capability has been added in recent releases.
µTorrent does try to foist a toolbar, home page change, search engine change and a software download during install.     Recent versions of µTorrent have been in disfavor at many private sites, supposedly for reporting to the tracker issues.
µTorrent has become by far and away the most popular bittorrent client due to its small, efficient, feature filled package.

Pros:  Excellent speeds on torrents, efficient and stable client with a large amount of features packed into a tiny package.  Excellent help resources. Streaming capability.

Cons:  Has had critical security alerts at Secunia. (though none on this version).  Toolbar install (not necessary for program) and search/home page change enabled at default on install.  Unnecessary software offered during install.   Recent versions of µTorrent have been in disfavor at many private sites, supposedly for reporting to the tracker issues.  Spigot toolbar offered during install along with home page and search engine changes.  Software offers from Open Candy.

bittorrent-main-screen-thumbBitTorrent.  Everything I said about µTorrent, above applies to BitTorrent as the two are identical in their options and engine.  Both are owned by BitTorrent, Inc., and are developed by the same development team.  If you prefer the name BitTorrent and its purple color over the µTorrent name and its green color, then that would be the only reason to choose this client over µTorrent.

Even though the two clients are the same, BitTorrent is still banned at most private torrent sites (even though they accept µTorrent). 

Like µTorrent, BitTorrent is a small and efficient bittorrent client with a great deal of features and will appeal to many despite the "extras" in the installation.

Bittorrent:  Spigot toolbar offered during install along with home page and search engine changes.  Software offers from Open Candy.

These last two clients offer a clean installation and performed excellently on the test torrents.  Their lack of support and some features is the reason they are last on this review.

Transmission-QT (Windows) is a basic bittorrent client that runs fast and has a simple interface.  It is missing some features and does not have much support.
This is not an "official" release of the Transmission team, but has been touted in their forums for years and now has its own site at Sourceforge.
Not quite as efficient, RAM and CPU wise as some of the other offerings here that have more features.
The clean install and basic interface will appeal to those who just want to download torrents and do not need any bells and whistles.  This Windows port of Transmission will give you speed with the best.

Pros:  Efficient and stable with excellent speeds.  Simple interface.  Clean install, no addons etc.

Cons:  Not an "official" release of the Transmission team and is lacking help resources.  Missing some features

halite-screenshot-thumbHalite has the smallest RAM use of the seven clients.  It is a clean, small and fast bittorrent client, but lacks some features and has almost no support facilities.  If you just want to download torrents on a client with a simple interface, the Halite is a nice choice.
Halite was off this list in last review as it had not been updated within a year.  The version tested here was released just prior to the testing for this review.  So, there is some uncertainty for continued updates. 
This is a good client for those who want a simple, no frills bittorrent client.

Pros:  Small, efficient and fast bittorrent client.  Lowest RAM use of the suggested clients.

Cons:  Missing some features.  Support is weak.  Releases have been sporadic.

 
Related Products and Links

  A full listing of the bittorrent help pages here at Gizmo's Freeware is now at

There are also links to the guides for each suggested bittorrent client in the Quick Selection Guide below.

Tixati
4.5
 
Gizmo's Freeware award as the best product in its class!

Runs as a stand-alone program on a user's computer
Stable and efficient with a good variety of options. Developers are active and responsive to user requests. Attractive interface. Good help resources. Clean install.
Help resource, though very good, could use some updates. Does not support web seeds.
http://tixati.com/
1.96
10.1 MB (32bit) 11.1 MB (64bit)
32 and 64 bit versions available
Free for private use only
A portable version of this product is available from the developer.
Windows 7 & 8, Windows Vista, Windows XP Windows Server 2003, Windows Server 2008 Linux
qBittorrent
4.5
 
Runs as a stand-alone program on a user's computer
Low and stable RAM and CPU with all the necessary features. Fastest performance on torrents. Development still seems to be very active and responsive to users. Clean install, no addons etc. Cross platform client.
Support has improved, but could be better. Not that well known and not accepted at many private torrent sites (though the situation is improving).
3.0.10
12.5 MB
32 bit but 64 bit compatible
Open source freeware
A portable version of this product is available but not from the developer.
Windows XP/Vista/7/8 Linux Mac
Vuze
4
 
Runs as a stand-alone program on a user's computer
There is a wide variety of options and information within the program and an impressive array of plugins to satisfy any need. Support for VPN and Proxy use is superior. Streaming capability. Cross platform.
Highest RAM use of the clients here. Spigot toolbar offered during install along with home page and search engine changes. Software offers similar to Open Candy. Advertisements within free version of Vuze interface (can be avoided by using Classic interface).
http://www.vuze.com/
5.0.0.0
9.1MB (32bit) 9.0MB (64bit)
32 and 64 bit versions available
Open source freeware
A portable version of this product is available from the developer.
Java support /Windows 95/98/Me/2000/XP/2003/Vista/Server 2008/7/NT/8, Linux, Mac
µTorrent
4
 
Runs as a stand-alone program on a user's computer
Excellent speeds on torrents, efficient and stable client with a large amount of features packed into a tiny package. Excellent help resources. Streaming capability.
Has had critical security alerts at Secunia. (though none on this version). Recent versions of µTorrent have been in disfavor at many private sites, supposedly for reporting to the tracker issues. Spigot toolbar offered during install along with home page and search engine changes. Software offers from Open Candy.
http://www.utorrent.com/
3,3.1
1.07MB
32 bit but 64 bit compatible
Free for private use only
A portable version of this product is available from the developer.
Windows XP, Vista, 7, 8, Wine Mac Linux (Alpha)
BitTorrent
4
 
Runs as a stand-alone program on a user's computer
Same as µTorrent above as they are identical bittorrent clients. Excellent speeds on torrents, efficient and stable client with a large amount of features packed into a tiny package. Excellent help resources. Streaming capability
Same µTorrent above, except that BitTorrent is not accepted at most private torrent sites. Has had critical security alerts at Secunia. (though none on this version). Recent versions of µTorrent have been in disfavor at many private sites, supposedly for reporting to the tracker issues. Spigot toolbar offered during install along with home page and search engine changes. Software offers from Open Candy.
http://www.bittorrent.com/
7.8.1
1.07 MB
32 bit but 64 bit compatible
Free for private use only
A portable version of this product is available from the developer.
Windows XP, Vista, 7, 8, Wine Mac Linux
Transmission-QT (Windows)
3.5
 
Runs as a stand-alone program on a user's computer
Efficient and stable with excellent speeds. Simple interface. Clean install, no addons etc.
Not an "official" release of the Transmission team and is lacking help resources. Missing some features
2..8.0
15.7 MB
32 and 64 bit versions available
Open source freeware
There is no portable version of this product available.
Windows XP/Vista/7/8
Halite
3.5
 
Runs as a stand-alone program on a user's computer
Small, efficient and fast bittorrent client. Lowest RAM use of the suggested clients.
Missing some features. Support is weak. Releases have been sporadic.
0.3.4
2.8 MB (32bit) 3.4 MB (64bit)
32 and 64 bit versions available
Open source freeware
There is no portable version of this product available.
Windows 95/98/Me/2000/XP/2003/Vista/Server 2008/7/NT/8

 

Share this
4.292455
Average: 4.3 (106 votes)
Your rating: None

Comments

by snakyjake on 29. July 2014 - 16:19  (117655)

This feature of qBittorrent interest me: "Tracker Exchange"
http://www.bittorrent.org/beps/bep_0028.html

However, the anti-leech system concerns me. I'm not sure if qBittorrent offers an intuitive method to inform me that my uploads/seeds are throttling my downloads.

by stranger195 on 14. April 2014 - 12:01  (115683)

According to Wikipedia, BitTorrent is a *re-branded* version of muTorrent (the letter that looks like a u is the Greek letter mu).

by not recognized on 11. April 2014 - 8:02  (115610)

Has anyone tried Deluge? I saw a peer using it. On the website they mention 'full encryption'. Would that provide privacy?

by bluesjunior on 14. January 2014 - 6:05  (113580)

I have been using qBittorrent for a long time and was quite happy with it until the latest v3.1.4 version which I have had problems with like not remembering settings and then not downloading at all after rebooting my PC. I have it working again now but it has made me come here to seek an alternative and to that end I see that Tixati is getting some good reviews. Is it possible to have both of them installed at the same time eg 64 bit Tixati and 32 bit qBittorrent and would both work off of the same ruleset/port on my Comodo CIS ruleset for qBittorrent which I set up after the tutorial here or would I need seperate rulesets/ports?.

by mr6n8 on 14. January 2014 - 12:05  (113586)

You certainly can have them both installed at the same time. I have all these clients installed.

I would suggest a separate ruleset with a different port for each client, though it is possible to use the same one (if you set a specific port to be cleared through the firewall).

If you are going to run both at the same time, then you will need a separate ruleset.

Steve

by bluesjunior on 14. January 2014 - 20:49  (113591)

Thank You.

by Nili on 9. December 2013 - 20:24  (112871)

Hello Ladies & Gentlemen

I'm using Linux for almost two years, at my beginning on Linux had very difficult to become familiar with torrent applications because i've been using uTorrent for so many years on Windows. Started with Deluge, i was pretty happy on my Ubuntu 12.04 and Deluge did the job well. When Ubuntu 12.10 come out some worse stuff hapened on Deluge home folder, each time that i change download destination folder Deluge still truncate /home/ and bring problem to me, some other problem with /quit and some not reporting to tracker so take off (purge), i know they've fixed the home folder with v1.3.6 but i won't go back to the Deluge for reasons (using Tixati below) tried qBittorrent, really lightweight, i like the skip hashchecking, but can't understand not having stop button on menu. Yes i want to stop torrent because Pause options is buggy and not report to tracker, I'm a seeder and i want a stop button before doing eject my HDD with command line, funny, this problem of pause not reporting to tracker is there since 2 years, Yes Pause not report to tracker at least on the private tracker where i'm member. (Purget this client too just for the pause that do not did the trick), works to pause torrents but not reported on tracker. Devs of qBit not want to implement a stop button well, i think they're wrong. Vuze, damn what to tell a Java application, lots of waste Mem and CPU, skiped since two simple test for 10min. kTorrent looks a complete when it comes to Options and Settings a lot of stuff for newbie and advanced, but for me it's a messy like default KDE, sorry but i not like at all KDE and his Interface.

From almost a 1 year i'm using Tixati may i rate this client 8/10

It would be appreciated and rate 10/10 if there are not missing something.
I will talk about this below.

I'm using "CrunchBang 11 waldorf" Debian Based. Tixati 1.96
Seeding on a Private tracker almost 700 DVD9 24/7 every day - All the options that his client are working pretty good, reporting to tracker, huge informations, stop , pause, edit, move, remove are precise. A balancing excellence during seed, some said it's a avarage for Download, well if everybody read a bit Optimizing Tixati can do even better regarding speed and sustainability. People said Tixati is fugly, guys, we're on Linux nothing is ugly. We have on our own hand to do what we want with graphic GUI - Here is my copy http://imageshack.com/a/img19/8397/srmr.png - does not look so, although I have anything put up regarding colors. What have minus?

Doesn't have options (skip hashchecking), i want so much this option, i have a lot of DVD to seed, but i not want to add them on transferlist by doing hashchcking everytime that i upgrade my Linux System because it takes time to 2 or 3 days and excessive fatigue of hard disk if not backup folder core .tixati at /home/ but this feature must have as on/off

some other features i've requested on official forum - http://forum.tixati.com/support/369/

For closure or conclusion:

If you're using Linux OS? get Tixati, no one else Work like Tixati. Build, customize, seed, and in the end you'll see what is needed is TIXATI.

I don't know how it work on Windows because never tested.

I'm for Tixati all the way.
Thank you for giving me the opportunity to tell my 2cents.

Regards,
Nili

by MrWhite on 12. December 2013 - 15:19  (112911)

Considering that Tixati not only comes with a few different interface themes by default, but also allows to easily -customize the colour of each individual item of its interface- to suit everyone's tastes (how many apps are that versatile ?), one can only assume that people who call it "ugly" either are the kind of end user who can't be bothered to open a program's options panel and see what's inside, or those who've just seen screenshots in the web and never actually tried it.

I don't think Tixati is perfect by any means (nor any other client I've tried), but it IS being actively developed and improved with each version, and given the alternatives in the market, it gets my vote over them any day of the week.

Those few remaining private tracker admins resistant to change and progress just need to smarten up and get along with the times. I guess it's up to us users to let them know.

by mr6n8 on 12. December 2013 - 18:13  (112914)

As to the "look" of Tixati, I agree with you on this. There are actually thousands of options for Tixati's display, taking into account the various themes, colors and fonts. This is one of Tixati's strongest features.

However, the issue at private trackers is not just one of being resistant to change. There was (as of 1.92 - not sure with 1.96) an issue of over-reporting data transfer amounts to the private tracker. There is a bit of work on the part of the private site to check any client (and many of the moderators are volunteers with plenty to do already) and once a client has an issue, they are less likely to review. Many sites still ban uTorrent 3 series based upon the first version and have not really re-tested since.

Also, the ability to spoof other clients makes it suspicious to private site operators, even though that should have no bearing.

One feature that I am surprised that Tixati has not enabled is support for web seeds. Given the huge amount of content over at the Internet Archive (supported by their servers) and other sites this is a growing area.

Steve

by Anupam on 9. December 2013 - 20:39  (112872)

I have been using Tixati on Windows since a long time now. I absolutely love it. It's got all I wanted, and it's perfect. Also, it's a clean software, no extras bundled. Just amazing.

Also, I don't find Tixati ugly at all. It's great.

Thanks for sharing your experience :).

by Kahomono on 16. November 2013 - 13:51  (112266)

I started using Tixati, and within two hours I started getting alerts from MalwareBytes that connections were being blocked to sketchy URLs in Russia, Ukraine, Kazakhstan. Hmm.

Uninstalled it and the alerts stopped.

by MrWhite on 29. November 2013 - 15:27  (112624)

Your own post answers your own question, leaving no room for doubt: whatever happened on your end, it has nothing to do with Tixati, but with whatever torrents you added to it, their trackers, and their interaction with your security software.

The exact same would happen with any other torrent client you would use with the same torrents, trackers and the same security software.

It's probably yet another false alert from an incountable number of false alerts and misunderstandings caused by contemporary real-time security software, but if in doubt, reconsider what torrents you're adding to your client, what trackers they use and where you get them. In the end, if you're unsure of what you're doing, it's always best not to do it.

by mr6n8 on 16. November 2013 - 14:19  (112267)

It has been a while since I have heard from someone on MalwareBytes and bittorrent. When they first added this into their product, there was a rush of activity on bittorrent forums.

Their list of "sketchy" URLs is overly broad (my opinion) and specifically of no importance in bittorrent (not an opinion).

Even if one assumes that their listings are correct, if you have chosen a safe torrent (one that is known to be clean and real either by comments or ratings), there is no way that anyone can inject malware into the content you are receiving.

It would not just be Tixati that would cause such alerts as I have heard from users of various bittorrent clients as to this issue with MalwareBytes' Malicious Website Blocking "feature".

Bittorrent clients make connections through trackers and DHT to many URLs and it is not unexpected that some will fall within the ranges chosen for their list.

A range or URLs is designated as dangerous when a certain percentage of URLs in that range are known to cause issues. No one ever tells what percentage will trigger the range block - it could be 10% (which means 90% of the URLs are OK or unknown). I can tell you from my personal experience that the blocklist will designate every seedbox user as suspicious, when these are the most valued users in bittorent due to their high upload speeds.

Some people consider such lists useful for web browsing, but they are of no use in bittorrent.

Steve

by robzuc on 2. November 2013 - 16:18  (111959)

I have found only this portable version of Vuze "available from the developer" [Link removed - not free] but it is a "Free trial". Furthermore, why don't you put the download links for the portable versions, as for the installable ones?

by mr6n8 on 2. November 2013 - 16:29  (111961)

Unfortunately, the portable field of the database here at Gizmo's has no option to insert links, only preset language.

I suppose I could put the portable links in the Additional Information field.

The Vuze portable is a bit more complicated than others. Since Vuze requires Java, to be truly portable the Java also needs to be run portable.
http://wiki.vuze.com/w/Portable_Vuze

There also is a Vuze to Go from Azureus, but it is not a freeware.

I had put together a portable Vuze package (java included) which I uploaded on a torrent site. But I have not updated it in some time. I might go through the process again and put it up.

Right now, I am testing clients for a new review, so if any of the above is to be done, it will be done after I finish testing.

Steve

by Anupam on 1. October 2013 - 20:48  (111152)

New client with an interesting name.

Yet Another uTorrent: http://www.yetanotherutorrent.com/

by mr6n8 on 1. October 2013 - 21:29  (111154)

Thanks for that Anupam. That is one I did not hear about.

Just went and got it. It is under a GPL license, so that is a good sign.

I installed and the options screens reminded me of another client (I could not remember which) and then I checked the "About" tab and it is based upon Halite.

It is a 2.85MB download and 8.44MB installed. So it is small, but not the smallest I have seen. Without any torrents running it is using about 3MB of memory. It will be interesting to see if it varies from Halite in any way.

Thanks again. I will give it a go in my next round of testing (I found another newbie I want to check out also).

Steve

by Anupam on 2. October 2013 - 6:09  (111164)

Interesting. Looking at the name, you would think that it would be based on utorrent :D. Will be interesting to know how it fares.

by George.J on 19. September 2013 - 8:02  (110859)

Could have switched to qBittorrent if it had a Scheduler feature. In terms of raw featuers Tixati seems to be the best, but qBitTorrent is faster.

by mr6n8 on 29. September 2013 - 14:42  (111085)

I have been away from my computer for a bit and did not have a chance to respond to this earlier.

First, thanks for bringing this up - the lack of a proper scheduler is a weakness of qBittorrent that I overlooked as I do not use a scheduler.

The "Alternative Global Rate Limits" feature is close to a real scheduler, but it lacks the ability to completely disable transfers. Setting the alternative to 1 KiB/s is the lowest you can go. Other than that, it does give some nice options.

The feature has been requested. However, since the development team is small, it is not likely to be added in the near future.

When I have a chance, I will add some info in the article on this.

Thanks

Steve

by naren on 30. August 2013 - 11:58  (110410)

Any feature or performance difference between install & portable version or both works same?

UTorrent & others too.

by mr6n8 on 30. August 2013 - 12:27  (110411)

I have used uTorrent both portable and install on many different occasions and have seen no difference in performance speedwise. I did not pay much attention to RAM and CPU, but I do not think there was a difference.

Some of the others I have used portable just a few times (I install for testing), and again have seen no difference in performance speedwise.

Nice question. I have not seen it raised before. Next round of testing I will run the portables just to make sure on RAM and CPU.

Steve

by naren on 1. September 2013 - 10:46  (110444)

I couldn't find portable utorrent on official site. Can you direct me to portable utorrent on official site?

by mr6n8 on 1. September 2013 - 14:26  (110449)

As I indicated in the other post (that I deleted), the portable is a do-it-yourself. I put up a guide for this.
http://www.techsupportalert.com/install-utorrent-bittorrent-portable-free

Steve

by mrjohncool32 on 4. July 2013 - 14:45  (108967)

I tried Tixati and I would suggestion uTorrent or Bittorrent over it 100%. I tried using Tixati and the downloads were slow. Switched the download to uTorrent and the download barely took 5 minutes to download. I know some are different than other ones but if Tixati can't download fast via my internet then I am wondering why is it so high rated?

by mr6n8 on 4. July 2013 - 15:18  (108970)

You did not give any information on how you set up Tixati or uTorrent, so I will have to guess why.

My guess is that you did not follow the guide here on Optimizing Tixati for Speed (and probably did not for uTorrent either).

A difference between the two is that uTorrent has an option (enabled at default) to automatically set an exception in the Windows firewall and Tixati does not have such an option.

I believe that if you had followed the guide for Tixati, then you would have found the speeds right there with uTorrent.

On the "highly rated", the article is clear that the top echelon of picks are essentially equal speed wise. The differentials are the look and info that Tixati gives as well as its lack of ads and addons in the install process that uTorrent and BitTorrent have.

Steve

by JJames on 3. July 2013 - 12:03  (108943)

I tried utorrent, it was the first program I tried for downloading. I find it generally easier to download directly from my web browser though, so I use the torch browser when I want to download. I don't think there's another one that does the same thing...

by mrjohncool32 on 4. July 2013 - 14:46  (108968)

uTorrent and Bittorent are pretty close to the same in features. The looks are similar as well. I have used both and they are great programs.

by mr6n8 on 4. July 2013 - 15:19  (108971)

uTorrent and BitTorrent are identical except for name and color. They are both built by the same release team and about the only real difference is that the uTorrent updates are released slightly before the BitTorrent update.

Steve

by mr6n8 on 3. July 2013 - 12:31  (108945)

Opera does have a built in bittorrent client and there may be some others. I did test Opera and Torch and Torch performed much better than Opera.

Torch did just as well speed wise as these clients. The reason it was not included was due to the lack of options and the RAM and CPU use was higher than using one of these separate clients. (Vuze used more RAM, but it does have many more options and addons)

Torch is not a bad option, just not as good as these.

My bottom line was that a user could have all the options available with a separate client and still use less RAM and CPU than Torch.

Steve

Gizmo's Freeware is Recruiting!

Gizmos Needs YouShare your knowledge of free software with millions of Gizmo's readers by joining our editing team.  Details here.