Jump to content

Whats the best Defragmentation Software


oOTNTOo

Whats the best Defragmentation Software  

916 members have voted

  1. 1. Whats the best Defragmentation Software

    • Diskeeper
      233
    • O&O
      174
    • Perfect Disk
      180
    • System Mechanic
      7
    • Contig
      8
    • Power Defragmenter
      18


Recommended Posts

I am not really a big fan of the metaphors and analogies with food. :wacko:

@Jeremy I dont think anyone is trying to shove anything down anyones throat. Lets not stifle discussion.

As for having 0 fragments after a defrag, thats not exclusive to PD, I know O&O always fully defrags - i dont see anything special here.

Everyone has a right to their own opinion. One thing i don't see is any technical information from an objective source about the relative effectiveness of these programs.

btw I want to thank teqguy for informing me about Config. I use other sysinternals apps, i overlooked that one. ;)

@oOTNTOo heres link to download a 30 day trial of both. they are the same price btw.

PerfectDisk http://fileforum.betanews.com/detail/Perfe...sk/1019208780/1

O&O http://fileforum.betanews.com/detail/OO_De...nal/995525249/2

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Jeremy, if you were personally offended by my opinion, I apologize.

However, I must reiterate my point: Windows does not differentiate between defragmentation tools, despite the user's preference. This is why fancy GUIs and special features are ultimately negligible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@teqguy what do you mean by "Windows does not differentiate between defragmentation tools"? Can you try to explain that better, sorry I am not understanding your point.

From what i read Contig defrags files on an individual basis, unlike a 'disk defrager', it does not 'intelligently sort' files on the disk.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What I mean is that despite what tool you use, defragmentation always has the same result: the files are no longer fragmented. Therefore, the software and hardware are completely complacent with a tool like Windows Defragmenter.

Now, as far as "smart sorting" is concerned, I find it to be a marketing gimmick. Why?

Well, if you partition your drive so that the operating system(and only the operating system) occupies the first partition, you not only accomplish what sorting aims to accomplish, but you also ensure that your operating system remains fairly unfragmented, thereby eliminating the need for such a tool in the first place.

I could enlighten you on similar partitioning strategies that take this a step further, but I believe this isn't the thread for that.

Edited by teqguy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

ok i understand your point, and i mostly agree with you. :)

As for partitioning i have setup winnt.sif before to put systemdrive on C program files on D and Documents and Settings on E. I went back to the default with everything on C, and then I install certain apps to D and use TweakUI to move special folder like 'My Documents' to the D partition. I moved to this method once i started using AcronisTI.

What do you do different?

By the way I found another software thats alot like O&O but it doesnt touch the system folders and its much lighter (1.5mb in %PF% and the service uses around 500kb ram). Seems to work just as good too.

http://fileforum.betanews.com/detail/mst_D...me/1097087166/1

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My best partitioning experiment took it slightly a step further...

I had the OS spread over two drives(the system and system32 folders occupied one partition, and the rest of the operating system files occupied the other), a partition for documents and settings, one for applications, one for temporary files, and one solely for the pagefile.

The result was undeniably worth the work, with everything staying neat and tidy, although it definitely isn't practical for most. I was unable to determine whether or not Windows actually booted faster, but it definitely seemed like it.

My next endeavor will also include a high speed CF card set to read only mode, which I'll put the system and system32 folders on. This should not only reduce boot times, but also protect the system against pesky spyware and viruses.

I checked out that defragmentation tool, but was immediately dissuaded from it, simply because it's not freeware.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

SmartPlacement is not a marketing gimmick. You can either just defragment the files and leave them where they are, or actually place them in certain order from the beginning of the disk outward, depending on how often they are accessed. If you even used PD, you'd see the visual display of the data and the difference between normal and SmartPlacement.

You're getting too wrapped up in this whole discussion, I think. Also, I think you need to actually use all the software before continuing because it seems like you're trying to tell me how Italy smells and tastes without actually going to Italy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually, I have PerfectDisk, Diskeeper, and O&O installed... and out of the three, the only one that sparked any interest was Diskeeper.

Why? Less resource usage. However, in that light, they all pale in comparison to contig.

Furthermore, I don't believe you have the right to make conjectures about me based solely on my opinions... that's called prejudice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Low resource usage, big deal. I have 2 GBs of Dual Channel, you think I'm worried about resources? I have less than 20 processes running at any given time.

Prejudice? :blink: You can be black, green, blue, orange, multi-colored and have 4 horns and a tail for all I care. :P

But when you say you think SmartPlacement is a marketing gimmick, but yet you say you have PD installed, which verifies visually that the files are placed intelligently as opposed to typical defragmentation, just doesn't seem too bright... (your reasoning, not your intelligence).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

what is it with being unable to resist replying to these threads?

well, to be honest, i like diskeeper, i like it a lot, also, i think its better suited for novices, as it can be set up automatically, and you don't even know its there, it just does its job, its great, it even gives you little cool maps of the drive and tells you all these cool statistics :thumbup

well, now i can remember back when we all used windows 95 and all the !!!111!!!111 talk was to people who refused to leave win 3.11 and just insisted win 3.11 plus win32's was exactly the same as win95...or something, anywho i remember back then norten made a very good defrag utility, (i'm sure it was norten? before they became all bloated?) anywho, i also remember when you run that, you actually noticed a difference, boot times seemed faster, opening explorer the files seem to wizz up quicker than before, it actually seemed to do something, moving on...

...for the last few years i have trusted diskeepers pretty maps, why shouldn't i, they appear to be making a huuuuuge difference, although i could never feel an improvement no matter how badly fragmented the drive was, after running diskeeper, i never noticed a difference.

I never questioned the fact they kept bringing out version after a version, i did wonder what do they do to keep improving it, i mean, what possibly could of changed to make it go from 7 to 8 9 10 etc, but after doing a few tests i discovered perfect disk seems to do a far better job, i'm not to bothered if neither of them can get 0 fragmented files afterwards, but what does interest me is when you notice a difference, until i used perfect disk i always assumed drives were just to fast to notice a difference, but after i run that i noticed windows seemed to start quicker, and again with explorer files list quicker too, so to me, perfect disk is the the best one, however, i feel diskeeper is overall a more usable program, but if you don't mind the amount of time it takes perfect disk is the answer!

also i've never heard of contig but i'm gonna hav a look on google now..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As for usability, being any easier than opening it, selecting drive, clicking the button and specifying whether to just defrag or place intelligently, and then go to a friend's house for example, dunno how easier it can get than that. :thumbup

Link to comment
Share on other sites

true it is easy to use!

but i find as the diskeeper is, well basically the same interface as the windows one, i feel its easier, plus i like the idea of how it can defrag in the background, or when the computer is idle, i'd really like an option like that for perfect disk! i'm guessing it wouldn't be as effective then tho.

after looking up that contig one, i'm not sure how that can be the best, doesn't seem like a defragger to me, just a file defragger?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just for everyone's reference, the Windows Defragmenter:

a ) Does not run on its own in the background. It will defragment and re-allocate files associated with the Windows Prefetcher from time to time, but it will not automatically defragment all of your hard drives automatically. This is one of the new features that Microsoft stated it would try to include in Vista.

b ) Deal with any sort of intelligent file placement unlike PD, DK, or O&O. It'll just try to make the files whole again. If there isn't enough space for the file, then it just moves on to the next one.

c ) Does not give very good information about what it's doing. A proper GUI will give you some information about what's going on. That's why it's called a Graphical User Interface - it allows you to interface with the program and extract information.

d ) Does not do a good job! I remember that I once had a "temp" drive where I used to just copy everything, from CDs, the internet, my downloads, etc etc etc - 20 GB of stuff. I had forgotten to run the Windows defragger on it (this was before I had heard of PD or DK or O&O). So I ran it... before defragmentation - 33% fragmented, after - 22% defragmented. I figured "It might need another go", so I ran it again - 22% fragmented after again... and again... and again. I ended up copy all the files to CD (I didn't have a DVD-burner back then), and then formatting the drive!

Yes, but you see, this is where we run into a quandry... should a defragmenter occupy enough clusters where it needs to perform gratuitous maintenance on its own files?

This makes sense with antivirus software, because it allows them to be self-healing... but I don't see the point with defragmentation tools.

Also, the argument about continuously needing to defragment itself... how would the files related to the program become fragmented again? Sure, the first time, you need to defrag another 15MB or so of files. For me, that's 0.1% of my hard drive space - not a significant amount. Unless they were modified, overwritten, or changed in any other way, they'll stay right where they are. Fragmentation only occurs when files are created or changed - not read.

You also fail to mention that both PerfectDisk and O&O mandate that their background services be running in order to even access basic defragmentation functionality out of the applications.

...

I don't know about you, but the only time I run my defragmentation tool is when I decide it's time to defragment the system(usually after installations/uninstallations, cleaning temp folders, Torrent download completions).

As for your defragmentation habits, sure that's fine, but ask the average user (i.e. anyone on the street) if they would rather deal with defragging themselves, or use 1-2% of their RAM to have the system take care of itself. The single largest selling point with most maintenance/security software is the "automatic" part - i.e. you don't have to do anything. If you're nit-picky about 5MB of RAM, then you should really re-think about how modern computers and operating systems work (I'll give you a hint - caches, caches, and more caches - it's all in memory).

I've got PerfectDisk on my laptop, and Diskeeper on my desktop at home. Reason I use those two and not the same? The one feature that Diskeeper has that PD doesn't - "Set it and Forget it". I've never once had to manually run fragmentation on my desktop at home since I installed Diskeeper. The concept of scheduling seems a bit odd to me, since there's not much point in defragging EVERY week if the system files haven't changed. If PerfectDisk came out with a similar feature, I'd install it at home in an instant. On my laptop however, I only run PerfectDisk every 3-4 weeks. My files don't change that much, and after enough time spend infront of this 15.4" screen, I've got enough of a "feel" for when it's time to defrag. ;)

Whatever you use will probably do the job for you. If one is "better" than the other - I have yet to find a completely unbiased third-party real-world test to prove this. For the record, Raxco should be ashamed of letting that system get over 100,000 fragmented files. The whole point of a defragmenter is to keep things in check. Diskeeper's methods are completely different from PerfectDisk - an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. If they can keep fragmentation at bay by doing several lightweight passes, then it's just as good (if not incrementally better) than doing one big-a** "here's everything" pass that PerfectDisk does.

If it's time of completion, then I hate to break it to you, but PerfectDisk and O&O only manage to shave off a quarter of the time it takes for Windows' defragmentation tool to complete.

I've observed Contig doing two-pass defragmentation completing in almost half the time.

As for time spent - the defrag tools will ALL take time to scan over your files - fragmented or not. If the disk has already been defragmented with PD or O&O or whatever else, what beneficial information can you get from the time taken to run a seemingly useless defrag pass with the Windows built in defragmenter. Unless one program takes significantly longer than another, there probably isn't much point in dealing with this.

By the way, I didn't mean this post as a personal attack, but just as a different point of view on the subject. I really don't see any reason to tell someone that they're wrong for using a particular program. I'd just like to get most of the facts straight so that people have the ability to make an informed decision.

Oh how I wish, I wish, I wish that I could install Windows on ReiserFS... :rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...