Best BitTorrent Client?

Gandalf23

I've been thinking of switching from Azureus to a different BitTorrent client.

Any recommendations anyone?

Basq

Azureus is the best i've used anyways!

Used BitTornado for a while - not bad but ain't got half the cool little features / plugins that Azureus has. RSS Importer especially nice!

radiospan

http://www.utorrent.com is a new one which is only going to get better.

Incredibly small, uses very little RAM, and it's easy to switch over to it from Azureus.

CyberGhost

ABC for me

BitTornado is ok but many times I find it lock up, the torrent just freezes.

Karoma

plazzTT wrote:

http://www.utorrent.com is a new one which is only going to get better.

Incredibly small, uses very little RAM, and it's easy to switch over to it from Azureus.

Just tried it there (briefly) - excellent!

radiospan

If Azureus wasn't Java and such a memory hog, it would definately be the best.

It's DHT thing is very handy too. uTorrent is implementing that soon.

Creamy Goodness

first client i got was azureus it worked first time so i saw no need in changing it.

Voodoo2

BitCommet Is what I use never had a problem!

Cake Fiend

I first started using Azureus as it was the only cross-platform client I could find at the time, and I've been fairly satisfied with it. I don't use it on a workstation though, as it really is a bastard for the memory.

Mac daddy

I use Bitlord never had any problems with it.

vibe666

bitlord here too. has some nice features and doesn't kill performance like azureus does.

The Troll

For speed bit tornado is definitely the quickest. I've used nearly every client out there and bit tornado is the only one where i regularly hit 200k a second. Its also extremely reliable, though is a bit crap for multiple torrent downloads - ie lack of a regular file sharing inetrface

commited

Bitcomet is much better imho

Cuddlesworth

Bit Comet- used them all and i think its the best

Creamy Goodness

The Troll wrote:

For speed bit tornado is definitely the quickest. I've used nearly every client out there and bit tornado is the only one where i regularly hit 200k a second. Its also extremely reliable, though is a bit crap for multiple torrent downloads - ie lack of a regular file sharing inetrface

excuse my ignorance but would that not depend on how many seeders there is of the given torrent and not what client you use?

patch

For those using Azureus, what have you found to be the optimal 'transfer' settings in the options tab?
I've got around the firewall and router but still get pretty low speds on esat..

WizZard

Azureus kept killing my system, and that was some feat!
Just using the official client at the mo'. Kinda awkward tho'

BopNiblets

I will second µTorrent, it's a healthy mix of Azureus and ABC, but without killing your DNS so you can't surf the web and torrent at the same time (stupid Azureus).
It's still a bit buggy at the moment, but it's number 1 for me!

Sparky

i used bit lord myself

AARRRGH

I use the original BitTorrent client.

Is there any reason you guys don't use this?

WizZard

dublindude wrote:

I use the original BitTorrent client.

Is there any reason you guys don't use this?

Lack of options would be the primary one I'd imagine.

Cerdito

I use BitComet (0.60), started out on the official BitTorrent client. Reasons why I like BitComet:

- Much more information available about trackers, peers, files etc.
- Speeds vastly improved when I made the switch, was getting max 50kB/s with the official client, regularly get up to 220kB/s with BitComet (on a 2Mb ADSL line)
- BitComet uses a random port, instead of 6881-6889 which allegedly ISP's monitor/choke. I regularly change the port I use, just in case my ISP keeps a log of traffic per-port and decides to limit
- Newest version has an option to preview file while downloading (haven't used this yet)
- No performance impact on my system (have heard Azereus can do this). I have a very mid-range laptop (P1.6 M / 512 MB)

Giblet

btdownloadcurses.py ftw :v:

randomfella

I use Azureus but I find that the speeds are extremely slow in comparison to shareware programs such as Limewire. Although this defies the purpose of using torrents doesn't it, with the whole legality issue?

Can anybody tell me where I can find torrents themselves. Im only aware of one site -snip-


Sorry for posting the url, that was stupid.

djmarkus

randomfella wrote:

I use Azureus but I find that the speeds are extremely slow in comparison to shareware programs such as Limewire. Although this defies the purpose of using torrents doesn't it, with the whole legality issue?

Can anybody tell me where I can find torrents themselves. Im only aware of one site - www.piratebay.org

I dont think that that post is going to prove too popular with the powers that be.

CuLT

µTorrent is buggy for now, I wouldn't use it until it's been sorted out.

Azureus is really the best client out there at the moment for versatility. It can do pretty much anything you can think of with a torrent.
Sure does eat the memory though

melekalikimaka

illegal torrents make baby jesus cry

The Troll

Cremo wrote:

excuse my ignorance but would that not depend on how many seeders there is of the given torrent and not what client you use?

Yes seeds is of course an important factor. Have downloaded the same torrent files with different clinets though and Bit Tornado comes out the quickest. Azureus is a snail with Esat, as is Bit Lord. Original BT is ok. ABC not bad. Y is buggy piece of crud

nadir

rtorrent ftw

WizZard

The Troll wrote:

Yes seeds is of course an important factor. Have downloaded the same torrent files with different clinets though and Bit Tornado comes out the quickest. Azureus is a snail with Esat, as is Bit Lord. Original BT is ok. ABC not bad. Y is buggy piece of crud

You could only do an accurate test of the client by downloading the same file at the exact same time on different computers (set up identically) with each PC using a separate, identical DSL line.

rabbitinlights

Another vote for Bitlord.

Ive tried a few others and always came back to it.


I might give uTorrent a blast and see what the story is.

The Troll

WizZard wrote:

You could only do an accurate test of the client by downloading the same file at the exact same time on different computers (set up identically) with each PC using a separate, identical DSL line.

Would that be accurate? What about location and the seeds connected to? Wouldnt you need to be connected to the exact same seeds at the same download speeds from each?