Light BitTorrent Client

Marelo · 12-22-2008, 04:47 PM

I'm looking for (as the title suggests) a light BitTorrent client. Specifically, I'm looking for something which will add no more than .3 lbs. to my notebook's overall weight.

No, just kidding.

I'm currently stuck with a netbook as my primary computing appliance (which, for the uninitiated, means 1.6 gigahertz and 512 MB) for about a month. I'm just looking for a BT client which can run in the background of browsing and media playback on my netbook without noticeably slowing the whole operation down.

Anyone have suggestions?

Bells · 12-22-2008, 04:52 PM

speed is not up to the torrent client, but the client itself and how many torrents you have on cue... if you mean "ram speed", pretty much the same rule applies.

I like bitcomet. It's very simple, easy to configure, easy to use and it's very light... my Girlfriend use it on a 1mb cable connection and she uses the web just fine with little to no slowdown while dowloading several GB of data over the week... it's painfree.

Marelo · 12-22-2008, 05:32 PM

I guess I should clarify that, by faster and slower, I mean the extent to which the computer's hardware is being bent to the various tasks. Like, the difference between Norton and a relatively "lighter" anti-virus like Avast!. The internet connection is not the concern, but, rather, the ability of the computer to run the program which utilizes the connection. So, I'm looking for something which does not occupy the computer's processes more than is necessary. I'm rambling. I'll stop now.

It seems a rather silly question to ask in the day of dual- and quad-core processors, I know. It just happens that my computer's hardware is very limited at the moment.

Eltargrim · 12-22-2008, 06:09 PM

uTorrent.

The entire name implies that it's small, and that's no lie.

Marelo · 12-22-2008, 06:15 PM

Ah, that will do nicely, Eltargrim. Thank you!

12-22-2008, 04:47 PM	#1
Marelo Napoleon Impersonator Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Kansas Posts: 816	Light BitTorrent Client I'm looking for (as the title suggests) a light BitTorrent client. Specifically, I'm looking for something which will add no more than .3 lbs. to my notebook's overall weight. No, just kidding. I'm currently stuck with a netbook as my primary computing appliance (which, for the uninitiated, means 1.6 gigahertz and 512 MB) for about a month. I'm just looking for a BT client which can run in the background of browsing and media playback on my netbook without noticeably slowing the whole operation down. Anyone have suggestions?

12-22-2008, 04:52 PM	#2
Bells That's so PC of you Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: In a Server-sided Dimension where time is meaningless Posts: 10,490	speed is not up to the torrent client, but the client itself and how many torrents you have on cue... if you mean "ram speed", pretty much the same rule applies. I like bitcomet. It's very simple, easy to configure, easy to use and it's very light... my Girlfriend use it on a 1mb cable connection and she uses the web just fine with little to no slowdown while dowloading several GB of data over the week... it's painfree. __________________ *BELLS STORE : Clothes! You wear* them! Free US Shipping Subscription System? WTF?! Zazzle Black!**

12-22-2008, 06:09 PM	#4
Eltargrim Fifty-Talents Haversham Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: FABULOUS Posts: 1,904	uTorrent. The entire name implies that it's small, and that's no lie. __________________ <Insert witticism here; get credit; ???; profit!>

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

12-22-2008, 05:32 PM	#3
Marelo Napoleon Impersonator Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Kansas Posts: 816	I guess I should clarify that, by faster and slower, I mean the extent to which the computer's hardware is being bent to the various tasks. Like, the difference between Norton and a relatively "lighter" anti-virus like Avast!. The internet connection is not the concern, but, rather, the ability of the computer to run the program which utilizes the connection. So, I'm looking for something which does not occupy the computer's processes more than is necessary. I'm rambling. I'll stop now. It seems a rather silly question to ask in the day of dual- and quad-core processors, I know. It just happens that my computer's hardware is very limited at the moment.

12-22-2008, 06:15 PM	#5
Marelo Napoleon Impersonator Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Kansas Posts: 816	Ah, that will do nicely, Eltargrim. Thank you!