|
These five freeware bittorrent clients are rated excellent as they performed at or near the top of all the bittorrent clients on all of the test torrents. All of the clients that are rated excellent had very low CPU use.
It would be fair to call all of these a Top Pick, but here at Gizmo's Freeware Reviews there can be only one. This time around, µTorrent, captures the Top Pick for this category. In my review a year ago I called it a virtual tie between µTorrent and Vuze, but gave the edge to Vuze. Vuze is also one of the excellent clients, but comes in second this year . Halite, did not even make the list last year as it caused high CPU issues on my computer. This time around there were no issues and it performed excellently. Tixati is a new bittorrent freeware that should be interesting to users. BitComet remains an excellent choice, but is overshadowed by µTorrent in efficiency and features.
A recent study reported by TorrentFreak, estimated that µTorrent had a 50% market share of bittorrent users, Vuze, the former leader in use, was second with 17%, BitTorrent (a µTorrent clone) was third with 12% and BitComet was fourth at 6.5%. Halite and Tixati were not even mentioned, but should be as they are is right up there with the others performance wise and are the only of the five with a clean install (no toolbar).
There are links to set up guides for these excellent clients and for articles on search sites in the Related Links section at the end of this review.
 µTorrent is the top pick because it is performs excellently, is efficient and has all the options that a basic bittorrent user could want. Additionally, µTorrent has great help resources and retains its focus on becoming a better bittorrent client. A short time ago they were acquired by BitTorrent, Inc. and were tainted by BitTorrent's association with the media industry. This quality program, packed in a tiny 281KB download, has overcome that issue to become the most popular bittorrent client. µTorrent's RAM use is lowest among bittorrent clients, matched only by Halite. Although not officially released yet, µTorrent's new uTP protocol establishes them as a leader in bittorrent. It is also a symbol of their focus on bittorrent as opposed to Vuze's progress. µTorrent is essentially a Windows only application, but can be run on Mac (Intel) and Linux with Wine (guide) There is a µTorrent for Mac now, but it is still in beta and was not reviewed here. µTorrent's FAQs, guides and forums make for excellent support. µTorrent Guides
Pros Excellent performance on all test torrents. Small, lightest (tie) on system resources but has all the needed features. Excellent support. Always improving as a bittorrent client.
Cons There were several "highly critical" security alerts for µTorrent in 2008 issued by Secunia. Although the present version has no security risks, you should be aware of this as none of the other "Excellent" rated clients has had a security alert issued by Secunia. Toolbar install (optional, but enabled by default) in program install.
 Vuze (formerly Azureus) was my former favorite due to its excellent performance, wide array of features and options and superior help resources. It has fallen to second due to µTorrent's rise and Vuze's lack of focus on bittorrent. Azureus was always well known for its informative interface and wide variety of plugins due to its being open source. This is still the case and the additions of the Vuze HD platform for legal torrents and the Friends plugin kept Vuze as a leader in bittorrent. However, neither of those has seemed to catch on. Apparently, Vuze now thinks of itself as a Video Application, rather than a bittorrent client, hence their recent focus on the stream and conversion feature. Vuze was improving their RAM use, but that seems to have taken a back seat to their video application development. Vuze is focusing on being a video application and is losing the bittorrent basics battle to µTorrent . Their recent release of a non-freeware portable version also soured me. Vuze is cross platform and has excellent support at its Azureus-Wiki, Vuze forums and Vuze FAQ. Vuze still performs with the best and for many would be an excellent choice. Vuze Guides
Pros Excellent performance on all test torrents. Excellent support. Wide variety of plugins and features.Open source. Vuze HD network. Friends plugin.
Cons At the high end of RAM use for a bittorrent client. Toolbar install (optional, but enabled by default) in program install. Advertisements on Vuze HD platform (not visible in Classic mode). Official portable version is payware.
 BitComet is the third choice due to its excellent performance, low RAM use and its ability to get through some networks that other clients can not seem to. Also BitComet provides very good help resources. It is a Windows only client that is missing remote control, but has all the other features a user would want. Its RAM use is on the low end, near µTorrent and Halite. Some users have reported that it is able to get through some networks (schools etc.) that other clients cannot. BitComet also has a media preview function that can help to avoid fakes. However this will slow download speed and fakes can be avoided by only downloading a torrent where the comments indicate it is clean and real. Their two forums (ToComet and P2P) are well maintained (there is a nice FAQ at the forums) and their wiki and blog provide some guides, making for very good support. BitComet has a loyal following of users and you may find it appealing also. BitComet Guide
Pros Excellent performance on test torrents. Very good support. Low RAM use. Able to get through some networks (schools etc.) that others can not.
Cons Toolbar install (optional, but enabled by default) on program install. Bad reputation has it banned at some private trackers. Not as efficient as others when initial seed. Advertisements on interface.
 Tixati comes in at number four as it performs excellently, is easy on system resources, has an appealing and useful interface and has no ads or toolbar on install. It lacks some features and its help resources need some work. Tixati has a very attractive interface and although not as efficient on RAM as µTorrent and Halite, it comes very close. Options are very accessible in the interface. Tixati is missing a scheduler and RSS feed. Its help resources are minimal right now, but growing. There is online help which will answer many questions, but still has a way to go before being complete. They do not have forums, but have a comments area, which is well maintained, but primitive. Tixati is a newer bittorrent client and is a work in progress. The use of Bytes for speed takes some getting used to. Tixati is available for Windows and Linux users. I am preparing a speed guide for Tixati.
Pros Excellent performance on test torrents. Very attractive interface. Low RAM use. Clean Install (no toolbar).
Cons Missing scheduler and RSS feed options. Minimal help resources.
 Halite is a lightweight bittorrent client that comes matches µTorrent in RAM and performance, but is open source and has no ads or toolbar on install. Its lack of features and support options keeps it from rising higher on this list. There are forums for Halite that appear to be well maintained, but Halite does not have a help file, FAQs or any guides. Halite is missing a scheduling feature and a RSS feature. Presently UPnP is temporarily hard coded always on (due to issue with underlying software). With those added and corrected and better support documentation, Halite could move up the list here. For those of you who do not need such documentation and a scheduler or RSS feed, this is an excellent choice. My view is that it is still a work in progress. Halite Guide
Pros Excellent performance on all test torrents. Lightest (tie) on system resources. Open Source. Clean install (no toolbar)
Cons Lack of support documentation. Missing scheduler and RSS. UPnP temporarily hard coded always on.
|
Other Suggested Clients
|
|
The following are freeware bittorrent clients that work well, but do not rise to the level of the excellent clients above. Three of these four clients tested excellent on all of the large and medium swarm test torrents, but stumbled slightly in comparison to the three above on several of the small torrents. The fourth, Miro, tested excellent on the small and medium swarm test torrents, but stumbled on three of the large swarm test torrents. Still, if one likes their interface, none of these would be a bad choice by any means. I have linked to their sites, rather than the more descriptive anchors here for the Top Picks, to keep this review to a reasonable length.
Three of these clients had very low CPU use. Miro had spikes of CPU use up to 15%.
BitTornado is a cross platform client that is missing some features, PEX, DHT, RSS and remote control and has a high memory use for a fairly basic client. Its forums are well maintained, with much input from the developer, but the FAQ is a bit weak. (Screenshot)
Deluge is a cross platform client that is missing a few basic features. Its memory use is high for a basic client. Its forums are not that active, but are well maintained. The FAQ also has some support info. (Screenshot)
BitSpirit is a Windows only client that is missing a few basic features and uses a moderate amount of memory. They do have forums that are sparsely used and a FAQ that consists of two guides. (Screenshot)
Miro is more than a bittorrent client, but its bittorrent features are basic and its RAM (and CPU) use is the highest of all clients. Miro did perform excellently on the medium and small swarm test torrents, but it performance on the large swarm test torrents was good. Its performance on the test torrents would rate it higher, but its extremely high RAM use puts it down here. Its CPU use was highest of all clients tested, but did not exceed 15%. If you use Miro for its other purposes, then it makes a very good bittorrent client (but no creating torrents). But as a standalone bittorrent client its high RAM use and lack of features makes any of the excellent clients here a better choice. (Screenshot)
|
|
Clients That Are Not Suggested
|
|
Arctic has not been developed in some time and it is a shame. This was the stablest of all bittorrent clients tested, never showing any CPU use and a never changing small RAM use. However, its lack of development hurt on the small torrents as it was not able to garner additional peers/seeds through DHT/PEX and its speeds were fair. It did perform excellently on the large and medium swarm test torrents.
BitLet is a browser based bittorrent application that initially had some appeal as it does not need to be installed. However it is a very basic bittorrent program that requires Java and uses a good deal of RAM (javaw.exe). It performed excellently on the large and medium swarm test torrents, but its performance on the small swarm test torrents was fair.
Ares (the real one at sourceforge) is a gnutella client that added bittorrent support. It tested excellent on the large and medium swarm test torrents but performed at the bottom on the small swarm test torrents. Ares seemed to have trouble rotating through the trackers on multi-tracker torrents and that hurt it on the small swarms. Its RAM use was surprisingly low and rivaled µTorrent and Halite.
ABC is based upon BitTornado and has better memory use, but it has not been updated since 2005 and that means it is missing many of the newer features of bittorrent. This hurt its performance on the small swarm test torrents where it performed poorly. It did perform excellently on the large and medium swarm test torrents.
BitTorrent Simply put Just get µTorrent. For some time BitTorrent has been the µTorrent bittorrent client, except that it adds the unnecessary software DNA to its download. DNA does nothing for bittorrent and is always running, even when BitTorrent is closed. Yes BitTorrent performed as well as the top three and yes DNA can be removed without affecting the bittorrent program, but again Just get µTorrent.
BitTyrant is an Azureus 2.5 knockoff that is supposed to deliver better speeds by slightly violating the bittorrent protocol. It tested excellent on the large and medium size swarm test torrents (but no better than others). Its performance on the small swarm test torrents was near the bottom. If you like the look Just get Vuze and set it to classic look.
Frostwire is a cross platform Gnutella/Bittorrent mix. It performed good on the medium swarm test torrents, but just fair on the large and small swarm test torrents. Its lack of basic bittorrent features and relatively high memory use (42,000K) also make it a non-choice.
Flashget is a download manager that has added bittorrent support. performed good on the medium swarm test torrents, but its performance on the large and small swarm test torrents was just fair. Flashget had issues maintaining connections with other seeds/peers that affected its performance. Its RAM use on the small and medium swarm test torrents was on the lower side, but its RAM use while on the large swarm test torrents was incredibly high, rising to 260,000MB before settling in at 130,000MB. CPU use was generally low, but there were spikes up to 20%.
Opera is a browser that supports bittorrent. It lacks many features and its RAM use (45000MB more than when just used as a browser) makes it a poor choice. It also fared poorly in the test torrents, performing good on the large, fair on the medium and near the bottom on the small.
BitLord is also based upon the old, buggy BitComet code and is banned at some private trackers. It performed the worst overall of all the clients tested. Its performance on the medium swarm test torrents was good and on the small and large test torrents it performed near the bottom.
|
|
Subscribe to our 
Go straight to the Quick Selection Guide
1.8.5 (Build 17091) 
Unrestricted Freeware 
Wine, Windows 95 (Winsock2), 98/ME, NT/2000, XP, 2003, Vista
Delicious
Digg
StumbleUpon
I found a program called "Rocket Torrent"
website can be found here: http://www.rockettorrents.com/
Thanks.
I will take a look at that when I have a chance.
Steve
i don't see a review for fdm but for flashget there is.
you can check on the link.
http://www.freedownloadmanager.org/
I had severe CPU/computer lockup issues with FDM when it began a bittorrent download so I could not test it.
Never had a problem with it, i used it on xp pro , vista ultimate and win7 build 7600 .
Halite has to be the best out there. Its open source with tons of options and uses little ram. the installer is 2.5mb but this contains both the x86 and x64 files. I LOVE HALITE! BTW If you are worried about your ISP change your domain name servers (dns) to opendns.com or maybe comodo's secure servers. Peerguardian isnt really all that effective, its like trying to cork a wine bottle with a pencil, some of em are going to get through (the ones not on your block list). PeerGuardian is however, better then nothing. Your best bet is to join a private tracker site and seed seed seed, so you dont get banned :)
When I install uTorrent, CA Yahoo!anti-spy identifies it as a trojan. And when I uninstall it, the trojan is still there. There are claims that it is a false positive, but why doesn't the "false trojan" just go away when I uninstall the software?
It is identifying the Application Data folder of uTorrent as a trojan.
To access the AppData folder click Start -> Run and type %AppData%\uTorrent. You must delete the folder, even if you empty it, as it is the folder name that CA is flagging as a trojan.
It is a false positive. CA has been identifying uTorrent that way for a while and no other anti-malware does. uTorrent and BitTorrent (a uTorrent clone), are used by 2/3rds of all bittorrent users.
You never give review about Deluge..... This is not completely full review... :)
Deluge is in there under "Other Suggested Clients".
Deluge's RAM use is considerably higher than uTorrent or Halite and it is missing some features that uTorrent has. uTorrent's various support options are also superior to Deluge's.
Also, it did not test as well on the small swarm test torrents. On 4 of the 10 small swarm test torrents Deluge had an average of 25% slower speeds than the top 4 (which includes uTorrent and Halite).
While the top 4 never stumbled on any of the 30 test torrents, those in the Other Suggested Clients ranking stumbled on a few of the small swarm test torrents (except Miro which stumbled on 3 of the 10 large swarm test torrents).
I know there are a lot of people out there who do not like uTorrent due to its being owned now by BitTorrent, Inc., having an optional toolbar on install and being closed source.
I think Halite is a better choice than Deluge if one wants open source and toolbar free. Still Deluge is not a bad choice by any means.
Steve
Edit: You can cast your vote for Deluge as the Best Free Bittorrent Client in the poll at our forum if you want:
http://www.techsupportalert.com/freeware-forum/internet-webware-and-netw...
I have used Utorrent for few weeks now, and there is an issue with my internet connection. Very often, while Utorrent download/upload normally, all other programs (browsers) can't access Internet. After searching on the net, it appears that many people meet this problem. I have tried different settings, but I could not find a solution. In my case (and some others), the problem seems to be my ADSL modem, it can't handle Utorrent. I have installed Halite for few days, and everything is fine, excepted maybe that Utorrent seems a little bit faster.
There should be no difference between uTorrent and any other bittorrent client as far as that issue. That usually is due to the bittorrent client using too much upload bandwidth or having too many open connections and clogging the modem. Still, Halite is a good client.
When you tired different settings, did you look at the Optimizing uTorrent guide under Related Links. If you like Halite, there is also an Optimizing guide for Halite, which should help speeds and still avoid that issue.
Steve
Hi Steve,
thanks for your reply. Yes, I have tried the Optimizing uTorrent guide, and also the advices provided by http://forum.utorrent.com/viewtopic.php?id=15992#p258231, but I still have some connection issues. Some people on the Utorrent forum still suggest that the problem is from cheap adsl modems or routers, they can't handle Utorrent requests.
It is certainly true that some modems and routers have trouble with bittorrent's many connections.
What I do not understand is why Halite does not have the issue when uTorrent does.
What is your Global Maximum Number of Connections set to in uTorrent?
What is your Total Max connections set to in Halite?
Hi Steve,
Global Maximum Number of Connections set to in uTorrent: 300 (but I tried with 100 before, and the problem was still there).
Total Max connections set to in Halite: 50, I did not change the default settings since I installed Halite.
Anyhow, today I noticed a slight interruption with the internet connection while Halite was working. I'll keep try it and see what happens. As for Utorrent, the connection interruption really happens too often, and almost every time I need to close Utorrent to get back my connection.
Thanks. It looks like you do have a modem that has trouble with bittorrent.
It is a misconception that the more allowed connections, the better the speed. Generally, you only get download from s small number of people anyways.
It looks like you need to cap globals to 50 or less in any bittorrent client. You might try that with uTorrent (or if you are happy with Halite-forget about uTorrent) and leave the rest of the settings as set forth in the Optimizing guide.
BTW did you do a TCPIP.sys patch to increase concurrent connections?
This does not help speed and can really cause trouble with weaker routers/modems.
What is the make and model of your modem? Maybe I can find some info to help.
Hi Steve,
no, I did not use TCPIP.sys patch.
I live in Taiwan, and we get internet via fiber-optic, therefore the modem is a Zyxel VDSL2 P-870HA. There is no router between my pc and the modem.
Unfortunately all of the web pages that I can find on that modem are in Chinese so I can not find any further info.
All I can say for now is to keep the global connections cap at 50 (or just under).
I peruse many bittorrent forums, so I am sure something on this will come up. I will post back if I see anything.
Steve
Just a little of track...But has any one used Peer guardian,to make your Torrents invisible to ISP's,as here in UK some chaps have had their internet just pulled by their ISP,seemingly because these ISP's decided that they should be judge,jury and executioner without a trial or warning!
Am asking this for any answers as ,does it slow you down and is it differcult to set-up and use.Just wandering before taking the plunge.
http://phoenixlabs.org/pg2/
There is a lot of controversy as to whether PeerGuardian (or any IP Filter) does any good.
It is not the ISP that is blocked it is the IPs that are "known" to be associated with media industry groups that enforce copyrights that are blocked.
An ISP contacts someone because one of the media industry groups contacted the ISP with the IP of one of the ISP's customers. The media industry groups troll through torrents (generally the more popular recent movies, albums etc) and note the IPs of those active on the torrent. The media group then contacts the ISP, who then contacts the customer.
Most bittorrent clients have an built in IP blocking feature that is better to use than PeerGuardian.
The controversy basically boils down to this
Those that are against the blocklists state that
1. The media industry can also get those blocklists as they are available to anyone. Therefore, they can just change their IPs to avoid being blocked.
2. The blocklists block many legitimate users and are detrimental to bittorrent as they block out a large number of users. As an example, uTorrent's site is on the BISS blocklist (the blocklist used by PeerGuardian). I have yet to see any evidence that uTorrent has cooperated with the media industry in turning users in.
Those that support PeerGuardian have this study to support their position.
http://arstechnica.com/old/content/2007/10/p2p-researchers-use-a-blockli...
Also, from what I have read the people at BISS are pretty good at finding IPs of the media industry groups.
I have used the built in IP filter in Vuze and uTorrent (using the BISS and another blocklist) and have not seen any difference in my download speed so that, to me, negates the argument of negative impact on bittorrent.
If you want to try a block list, it is better to use the built in IP filter of your bittorrent client as it is more efficient at keeping the offending IP from connecting at all. Those are are pretty easy to set up.
Which bittorrent client do you use?
I do agree with you on the ISPs accepting the word of the media groups without question. It would be almost impossible to prove that someone used bittorrent to infringe on copyrights (Kazaa and older P2P systems were much easier to prove). I am a lawyer in the USA and unless the courts are willing to bend the law (which they may well do) the media groups should never have a case against a bittorent user.
Very nice keroffs
And in response to the other comment...
Peerguardian cannot protect you from your ISP. "Theoretically" it can protect you from other groups such as media companies and such.
However this is hotly debated and in my opinion folly. Peerguardian blocks 3/4's of the world's IP's in an "attempt" to protect you.
Post new comment