Welcome to MSFN

Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to contribute to this site by submitting your own content or replying to existing content. You'll be able to customize your profile, receive reputation points as a reward for submitting content, while also communicating with other members via your own private inbox, plus much more! This message will be removed once you have signed in.


thecavern

Defragmention Question

9 posts in this topic

I am thinking about running the defragmention feature.

However, I'm not sure whether I really need to do so.

Is there any way to check the hard drive prior to running defragmention

in order to determine whether defragmention needs to be executed ?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Get the DiskTrix free Domain edition and give it a look-see. The graph is easy to read and offers more detail than anything else.

http://www.pcworld.com/product/950263/ultimatedefrag-free-public-domain-edition.html

I'd give the file/folder defrag (alphabetically and closer to $MFT) to improve performance. Even if your files are 100% defragged, you can be a little faster if the files are re-aligned closer to the master file table.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm fairly certain that Vista will automatically defrag the disk by default.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm fairly certain that Vista will automatically defrag the disk by default.

Something else, set apart your fair certainty? ;)

http://www.howtohaven.com/system/vistadefragmentation.shtml

The "issue" is that anything where fragments are 64 Mb or more is considered "contiguous".

@MrJinje

Have you actually read what is listed as "Pro"? :w00t: on that site:

Pros

  • Free
  • Intelligent placement of files during defrag
  • Excellent drive display
  • Awkward and confusing interface

:lol:

Seriously, before starting the usual flamewar about which defragmenting utility is better, there are several freeware ones available, besides running a ful defrag from command line, more or less each of them does what is needed, and the actual differences in results between any two of them are one of those things that only a few experts may (please note the dubitative form) be able to understand/benchmark/compare properly.

Other well known tools are:

http://ultradefrag.sourceforge.net/en/index.html

http://www.kessels.com/jkdefrag/

jaclaz

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

run defrag C: /A, this should show you if Windows thinks it needs defragmentation.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

sorry, haven't looked at your link because your other links suggested ugly 3rd party tools.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@MrJinje

Have you actually read what is listed as "Pro"? :w00t: on that site:

Pros

  • Awkward and confusing interface
Other well known tools are:

http://ultradefrag.sourceforge.net/en/index.html

http://www.kessels.com/jkdefrag/

Yeah, they don't host it on Disktrix.com anymore, so the only places to find it are on CNET and other download sites. Hadn't seen that 'pro' but don't matter, I like the app, works fine for me. But whichever advanced defragger (also had never seen the other two before) you use, I can verify that normal defragging does not cut it on drives with hundreds of thousands of small files. Things like searches/scans etc take longer because the defragged files are not 'in order'. Meaning when the hdd is jumping one section of the platter to reach the next tiny file it adds milliseconds delay each time. Not noticeable until you have a vast number of files, but things like Anti-Virus can shave off a few seconds / minutes of run-time.

Normal Defrag = randomly putting all books on one shelf

Advanced Defrag = dewey decimal system. in order, easy to find. $MFT is the card catalog.

Edited by MrJinje
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@MrJinje

Well, searches (at least on NTFS) should be almost instantaneous (of course not with Windows Search).

JFYI (if you haven't seen Ultradefrag and JKdefrag before it is unlikely that you know about this relatively new kid on the block :thumbup: , Swiftsearch):

http://reboot.pro/topic/18855-windows-file-search-utility-that-is-fast/

http://sourceforge.net/projects/swiftsearch/

I am pretty sure that you can appreciate the differences between the "standard" defrag and a more advanced tool :), what I was saying was that once "beyond" the "standard" defrag, the comparisons between the various more advanced tools (particularly those where file placement strategy can be chosen/programmed) is not easy at all.

jaclaz

Edited by jaclaz
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.