1 In the next table we will discuss a comparison between \emph{swift} application and BitTorrent. We take into
2 consideration the most important features that we have in \emph{swift} and BitTorrent.
5 \begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|}
7 \centering{Properties} & \multicolumn{2}{|c|}{Protocols} \\
9 & Swift & BitTorrent \\
11 Listening Ports & 1 & 1 \\
13 Sockets create for getting M pieces & 1 & M \\
15 Packets receive for sending 1 piece & 1 & 1 \\
17 Packets send for sending 1 piece & 1 & $Nr_{fails} + 1$\\
19 Packets send for getting 1 piece & N & $Nr_{fails} + 1$ \\
21 Packets receive for getting 1 piece & N & $Nr_{fails} + 1$ \\
23 Util packages when getting 1 piece & 1 & 1 \\
25 Recall posibility & $\approx$$\frac{100}{2^{N}}\%$ & $0\%$ \\
27 Time to getting M piece & $M * T_{fastest}$ & $T_{slowest}$ \\
29 Bandwidth used & high usage & high usage \\
34 This comparison table highlights the advantages of \emph{swift} over BitTorrent. \emph{Swift} uses a socket per file,
35 whereas BitTorrent opens as many as M sockets. This is particularly useful for big files. Also, if BitTorrent connects
36 to a lower seeder the waiting time will be bigger compared to \emph{swift}.
38 In the case of transferring many small files, BitTorrent will be better than \emph{swift}. Another case when
39 \emph{swift} is less than BitTorrent is for the first transfer between a peer and a seeder. Both of them use the same
40 bandwidth, but the overall performance appears to be better for \emph{swift} in the Internet.