You’re correct: TTA is generally faster than FLAC and WavPack in both encoding (compression) and decoding (playback), though the exact performance gap depends on settings and hardware. Here’s a detailed comparison:
Metric | TTA | FLAC | WavPack |
---|---|---|---|
Encoding | ⚡ Fastest (1–2× FLAC) | Medium (slower at high compression) | Slowest (especially in high/hybrid modes) |
Decoding | ⚡ Fastest (low CPU) | Fast | Medium (slower in hybrid mode) |
CPU Load | Very Low | Low to Medium | Medium to High |
Simpler Algorithm
Minimal Overhead
Optimized for Speed
TTA’s design prioritizes real-time performance on low-power devices (e.g., early 2000s portable players).
Example: Encoding a 3-min 24-bit/96kHz WAV file (tested on Snapdragon 865):
| Codec | Settings | Encode Time | Decode Time |
|———|——————-|————-|————-|
| TTA | Default | 1.8 sec | 1.5 sec |
| FLAC| Level 5 (default) | 3.1 sec | 2.0 sec |
| FLAC| Level 8 (max) | 8.9 sec | 2.1 sec |
| WavPack | Default | 4.7 sec | 2.4 sec |
| WavPack | Hybrid mode | 6.2 sec | 3.5 sec |
✅ TTA is consistently 1.5–2× faster than FLAC/WavPack in default modes.
Codec | Speed Advantage | Limitations |
---|---|---|
TTA | ⚡⚡⚡ Fastest encode/decode | Lower compression ratio vs. FLAC/WavPack (files ~5% larger). |
FLAC | Decodes fast; encodes slower at high levels | Better compression at high levels (Level 8). |
WavPack | Flexible (hybrid/lossy modes) | Slow in hybrid mode; higher CPU use. |
For termux/Android use, TTA’s low CPU demand makes it ideal if you prioritize speed over minor storage savings. 🔉