Here is the previous topic for reference: http://www.msfn.org/board/index.php?showtopic=18603

Links to software in poll:

01. http://www.microsoft.com/

02. http://www.diskeeper.com/

03. http://www.perfectdisk.com/

04. http://www.oo-software.com/

05. http://www.defraggler.com/

06. http://www.auslogics.com/disk-defrag

07. http://www.disktrix.com/

08. http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/sysinte...s/bb897428.aspx

08. http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/sysinte...s/bb897426.aspx

09. http://www.kessels.com/Jkdefrag/

10. http://ultradefrag.sourceforge.net/

11. http://www.mstsoftware.com/

For me Diskeeper is the best. I use it more then a year and it works very good. I can really notice very good performance of my disks.

Cheers

I voted for Raxco's PerfectDisk (v10). Running it on Windows 7 right now and its great. I have not ran an offline defrag yet, but I did just make a backup. I'll give it a whirl and post back results.

I am using Defraggler occasionally, usually after initial install. I am not sure about the performance benefits, but I can notice a reduction in seek noise

Still voting for PerfectDisk. I've upgraded to the "for vmware" version recently (on Vista x64), which also defrags my VMs, without even having to install it in them. The Virtual Enterprise Ed is looking good too. It's still a lot better than Diskeeper and priced better too

I'm using the build in tool from Vista.

I voted for Diskeeper. Would have specifically selected the 2009 Pro version if that option was there. It's the best defragger I've come across..set and forget...never worry about defragging.

Diskeeper

Forgot to post back, lol. PD 10 offline defragged just perfectly on Win7 beta 1. Its safe guys and gals, lol. PD 10 is DA BEST!

Is there any test or review putting the freeware defraggers against Perfectdisk and Diskeeper?

How about a test that shows if there is a performance gain after defragmenting?

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.

I have got to say, Windows XP's built in defragger works fine for me. It is simple, and although it can't do much really and only increases performance by a very small amount on my system, it does the job. On computers like mine which gets a registry clean, virus clean, spyware clean, driver sweep every time new drivers are installed etc, it doesn't do much but on slower PC's with a lot of junk on them it can help a bit. I have heard good thinks about diskeeper and will probably end up trying that out to get max performance.

Edited March 16, 200917 yr by Zenskas

+1 Defraggler

Pros

:Free

:Low Level Defrag

:Defrag Free Space

Cons

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 March 16, 200917 yr by alrichdesa

I'm using Jkdefrag, since it's very lightweight, fast, features several optimization strategies and is freeware/open-source

http://www.kessels.com/Jkdefrag/