7-Zip, WinRAR, and WinZip are very popular file compression and extraction tools. 7-Zip is the most popular open-source software without trials, costs, or restrictions. However, WinRAR handles the RAR files natively with a better UI than 7-Zip. WinZip has the best UI but is paid. There are different use cases for three of these, though they can sound and look like competitors to each other. Let’s compare them all and see which one suits you best.
Free software are enough for archiving, extraction, and encryption. So, most users are good with 7-Zip and WinRAR. However, in some cases, you are required to go for the paid tools liks WinZip and WinRAR (paid) just to use the features or the ease-of-use. So, we are going to check which one of these software are best in which situation. We are also going to compare their performance. So, by the end of this article, you’ll know which of these should you use.

All of these have their own reputations in the industry. People use 7-Zip when they want powerful, free compression with broad format support. They go for WinRAR when they need robust, reliable archiving with RAR support and recovery features. Finally, they choose WinZip if they prefer a polished interface, cloud tools, and office-centric functionality.
7-Zip vs WinRAR vs WinZip: Comparison Table
Feature | 7-Zip | WinRAR | WinZip |
---|---|---|---|
Price | Free & Open Source | Paid ($29, lifetime) (but works after trial with reminders) | Paid ($29.95+ per year) |
Compression Efficiency | Best (7z format) | Good (RAR format) | Lower (ZIP format) |
Compression Speed | Slower for max compression | Fast | Fast |
Supported Formats (Extract) | ZIP, RAR, 7z, TAR, ISO, GZ, etc. | ZIP, RAR, 7z, TAR, ISO, GZ, etc. | ZIP, RAR, 7z, TAR, ISO, GZ, etc. |
Supported Formats (Create) | 7z, ZIP, TAR, GZ | RAR, ZIP | ZIP, ZIPX |
Native Format for Compression | 7z | RAR | ZIP |
Encryption | AES-256 | AES-256 | AES-256 |
Splitting Large Archives | Yes | Yes | Yes |
Cloud Integration | No | No | Yes (Google Drive, Dropbox, OneDrive) |
User Interface (UI) | Basic & outdated | User-friendly | Modern & polished |
Platform Support | Windows, Linux, Mac | Windows, Linux, Mac | Windows, Mac |
Shell Integration (Right-Click Menu) | Yes | Yes | Yes |
Self-Extracting Archives (SFX) | Yes | Yes | Yes |
Multi-Core CPU Optimization | Yes | Yes | Yes |
Trial Period | Free forever | 40-day trial (but works after) | 21-day trial (stops working after) |
Test File and Benchmark Methodology
To test the performance and efficiency of this software, I have created a folder with a mixed type of files, like videos, images, audio, and text. The total size of this folder is around 35GB. We are going to use the same folder for compression to test all these programs. Different software may have varying archive options

Now, compression and extraction performance also depend on the system specifications (mainly CPU) and the storage drive you are using. Here, I am using the Silicon Power UD90, which is a DRAM-less SSD with TLC NAND flash. So, this test is useful for comparison, but the results may vary depending on your system.