Login to Account Create an Account
Poll and Discuss Defragmentation Software
Posted 03 February 2009 - 03:00 PM
Links to software in poll:
Posted 03 February 2009 - 03:23 PM
4 GB DDR2 OCZ 1200
Posted 03 February 2009 - 03:28 PM
Posted 03 February 2009 - 03:48 PM
Posted 04 February 2009 - 08:01 AM
Posted 04 February 2009 - 08:16 AM
Posted 04 February 2009 - 08:18 AM
4 GB DDR2 OCZ 1200
Posted 12 March 2009 - 07:02 AM
Posted 12 March 2009 - 08:18 AM
Posted 12 March 2009 - 10:12 AM
How about a test that shows if there is a performance gain after defragmenting?
In basic theory it should definitely help with reads scattered over a disc, since the header has to physically move between tracks; the whole process of which creates an access time. Then hopefully all the data is contiguous on that track so it doesn't have to go through the expensive process again. This doesn't pertain to SSD drives where the access time is virtually wirespeed and uniform.
These days it matters less with discs being generally faster, thus reduced latency, and having better seek logic such as NCQ. Also memory is relatively cheap, and Operating Systems like Vista have SuperFetch, so we need to access the disk less often.
Posted 16 March 2009 - 04:54 AM
Edited by Zenskas, 16 March 2009 - 04:56 AM.
[Passive Gamer] Silverstone TJ08-EW | Intel Core i7 3770S | Silverstone Heligon HE02 | ASUS Maximus IV Gene-Z/Gen3 | 8GB Kingston HyperX Fury 1866MHz | Samsung 840 EVO 250GB | ASUS GTX 750 Ti Strix OC 2GB | Antec Neo HE 550W |
Posted 16 March 2009 - 07:02 AM
:Low Level Defrag
:Defrag Free Space
No Page File Defrag
No Boot Defrag
No Registry Defrag
The fact that it is freeware, it makes up for all the cons. Besides it is more than sufficient for the average user!
Best paid defragmenter = Diskeeper
Edited by alrichdesa, 16 March 2009 - 07:14 AM.
-- Ashleigh Brilliant
Posted 09 April 2009 - 09:42 PM
I think the defrag business is all smoke an mirrors. Show me some benchmarks where I would notice a difference and I'll change my tune.
If someone helps you fix a problem, please report back so they and others can benefit from the solution. Thanks!
Posted 18 April 2009 - 11:53 AM
I don't need a fancy interface, and I personally trust Jeroen. His forum speaks a thousand words of pure wisdom regarding Windows and harddisk usage. Last but not least, it's not so tough on SSD either.
Posted 02 July 2009 - 08:30 AM
Posted 02 July 2009 - 11:17 AM
Posted 06 July 2009 - 10:51 AM
i reinstall windows a cpl of times a year anyways.
all my data is stored on a linux server and its just backup.. who cares about defragging it, i dont need speed, it already transfers over 100mbps..
and my desktop just has my games/programs on it, nothing more.
and my desktop is raid0 and server raid6...
Desktop: || lappped Q6700 w/ lapped TRUE || ASUS P5Q Deluxe|| Sapphire 4870 1GB || Mushkin Ascent XP2-8500 (2x2GB) || 2 x WD6400AAKS || Corsair HX620W || Lian-Li PC-60FB || 2 x BenQ G2400WD || Vista Ultimate 64bit || Samsung SH-S223Q || Logitech MX518 || Logitech Ultra-X || SteelSeries SX || Klipsch ProMedia Ultra 5.1 || ATI TV Wonder 650 PCIe ||
Server: || E5200 w/ XIGMATEK HDT-S1283 || ASUS P5Q-EM || EVGA 8800GTS G92 w/ Accelero S1 R2 || G.SKILL 6400 2x2GB || 1 x WD6400AAKS || 4 x 1TB Samsung F1 || SeaSonic M12II SS-500GM || Antec Three Hundred || Samsung SH-203BL || Ubuntu 8.10 ||
Posted 17 February 2010 - 06:14 AM
For normal users I usually recommend Raxco's Perfect Disc and O&O, however, I was disappointed with their latest packages. They're bloated and offer little in terms of efficiency. Also, they suck defragging huge files on really cluttered up hard drives. I used them on a 300GB HDD before and they just gave up on the biggest files. Even worse, they sorted the files in a totally inefficient manner without giving me the option to influence that. Whoever remembers SpeedDisk from Norton Utilities for Win95 knows that this great program already offered personal sort options, so why can't these overpriced, bloated other software packages offer that?
Anyway, Disktrix has no problem with big files on almost filled up hard drives at all. I tested it on a 500GB HDD filled with 1GB+ sized files with a fragmentation degree of 85% and with about 5% of free space. It managed to defrag the hdd completely. Only a single file was left in 2 fragments. After seeing Raxco and O&O giving up on a much easier task, I was pretty impressed.
Furthermore, UD not just allows for personal sort orders, it also allows for special file placement to make use of a hard drives slow and fast parts. This is an essential option that no other defragger that I tried offered. Using this option, I was able to boost the boot up speed of a 6 year old Notebook with WinXP on it from 2 minutes to just 25 seconds (it has a very slow HDD). Add the fact that UD is one of the smallest and sleakest defraggers and you have a great program. It also supports boot time defrag, which is a rare feature and it allows for defragging the MFT, which is even rarer. Afaik, hardly any other tool does that.
Posted 19 February 2010 - 05:44 PM
Personally, then i still just use JkDefrag, as i don't have use for the new functionality and like using cmd parameters instead of inlcuding all the scriptfiles etc.
I preffer JkDefrag ower the built-in XP defragger, because JkDefrag is faster, automatic i.e. defrags all partitions and quits by default, does file-placement and can defrag big files etc.
Edited by Martin H, 19 February 2010 - 05:48 PM.
Posted 16 April 2010 - 11:28 PM
Posted 26 April 2010 - 11:58 AM
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users