Small Ratio ISO -> CSO Compression

[lhsonic]

Should I?

If a CSO is only 10mb smaller than my original ISO, is it worth it to compress to save that small 10mb?

[dblock110]

of course it is! why wouldnt it be? i compressed ALL of my ISO's to CSO. even if its only a 5mb difference! i have a 2gb card and i want to get as much space as possible out of it. theres no difference in it being CSO so why not?

[lhsonic]

of course it is! why wouldnt it be? i compressed ALL of my ISO's to CSO. even if its only a 5mb difference! i have a 2gb card and i want to get as much space as possible out of it. theres no difference in it being CSO so why not?

Actually, there is a difference, there is slow down.

[sticky]

not worth it IMP.. cso usually will lag more than when you play the game as a .iso.. so if the compression rate is so low.. i recommend you stick with .iso.

[elbarto1]

if you play the .cso at 333mhz i find that there is very little/no more slowdown.
huge example is most racing games (midnight club 3 - especially)

[psp3o3]

it's better .iso (more fast) but to gain space into your memorystick use .cso

[ADW]

I've compressed all my .ISOs to .CSOs and never noticed any slowdown.
If there is a slowdown, you can always just uncompress them back to .ISOs.

[xapex]

It also depends on the size of MS u own.If u got enough space , iso is better.
If u got no space , then cso / rip the game is your only choice.

[kojima1]

if you play the .cso at 333mhz i find that there is very little/no more slowdown.
huge example is most racing games (midnight club 3 - especially)

I find it depends on the game. Daxter slowed down in areas even running at 333mhz

[Bowsey]

Pro Evo 5 cso gets no slow down on 222, but it crashes on 333mHz. It is also faster on dev 0.46 than dev 0.45 or earlier. Dont know y though