PeaZip vs 7-Zip
Two of the top three file compression programs, compared rule by rule on published facts.
In short
- PeaZip has 95 points and 7-Zip 91, 4 apart on our file compression software rules.
- PeaZip earns more on formats and protection; 7-Zip earns more on systems.
- Cost for the first year: PeaZip $0, 7-Zip $0.
- Only PeaZip meets: repair of damaged archives.
- Only 7-Zip meets: Windows on ARM.
95/100 #1 of 10
Best for: People who want a free archiver with file-name encryption and many formats.
Points by group
| Group | PeaZip | 7-Zip |
|---|---|---|
| Formats of 20 | 18 | 16 |
| Protection of 29 | 29 | 24 |
| Tools of 22 | 22 | 22 |
| Systems of 9 | 6 | 9 |
| Price of 20 | 20 | 20 |
| Total | 95 | 91 |
Rule by rule
What each vendor publishes, and the points it earns. Sources are on each product page.
| Rule (points) | PeaZip | 7-Zip |
|---|---|---|
| Archive types you can create (12) | ZIP, 7z, TAR, GZIP, Zstandard 10 | ZIP, 7z, TAR, GZIP 8 |
| Archive types you can open (8) | RAR, 7z, ISO, CAB 8 | RAR, 7z, ISO, CAB 8 |
| AES-256 encryption (12) | Yes 12 | Yes 12 |
| Hides file names (7) | Yes 7 | Yes 7 |
| Repair of damaged archives (5) | Yes 5 | No 0 |
| Open source (5) | Yes 5 | Yes 5 |
| Split into volumes (6) | Yes 6 | Yes 6 |
| Self-extracting archives (3) | Yes 3 | Yes 3 |
| Command line (5) | Yes 5 | Yes 5 |
| File Explorer menu (5) | Yes 5 | Yes 5 |
| Portable version (3) | Yes 3 | Yes 3 |
| Systems (6) | macOS, Linux 6 | macOS, Linux 6 |
| Windows on ARM (3) | Not published 0 | Yes 3 |
| Free to use without a time limit (8) | Yes 8 | Yes 8 |
| Cost for the first year (12) | $0 12 | $0 12 |
PeaZip
PeaZip suits people who want a free archiver with strong encryption, hidden file names and a wide list of formats. It adds volume splitting, self-extracting archives and a Windows context menu. The catch: it cannot create RAR archives without WinRAR installed, and the download pages list no native Windows ARM64 build.
7-Zip
7-Zip suits anyone who wants a no-cost archiver with AES-256 and open source code. It also offers volumes, self-extracting archives and a command line. The catch: it cannot create RAR or Zstandard archives, and its documentation describes recovery of damaged archives as a manual job.
Both products are scored by the same rules: how we score file compression programs.