The GUI is pretty ugly, IMO.

The GUI is fine. You're looking for performance, not pretty looks.

OMG Return of Opera vs Firefox

OMG Return of Opera vs Firefox

Ok, well, if PerfectDisk had the worst GUI ever but was proven to be the best performing defragmenter of all, wouldn't everyone use it?

Anyway, I was simply emphasizing that the GUI is not what should be focused on. I'm not going through this crap again.

Ok, well, if PerfectDisk had the worst GUI ever but was proven to be the best performing defragmenter of all, wouldn't everyone use it?

Anyway, I was simply emphasizing that the GUI is not what should be focused on. I'm not going through this crap again.

You'd be surprised how much people want great looks more than a better program (with better/more features)...

I personally us PerfectDisk because it defrags better than the others. It's smarter at placing MFT properly unlike DK (and also respects MFT growth zone and such), it defrags the NTFS metadata (which other defraggers like DK won't even touch), and hibernate files, and tons of stuff like that. It's far faster too (just do a comparison if you want), and even the basic/cheap versions has network admin features that you only find in more expensive versions of DK. And it can do its job even on volumes with very low space (half of what DK needs - I know I'm pretty bad at overfilling partitions... Always out of HD space!) In short, it's doing a far better job much faster - works for me.

Hopefully it won't turn in that opera-firefox thread indeed.

Regarding the MFT, Diskeeper can resize it to a recommended value or a custom one set by the user.

Regarding the MFT, Diskeeper can resize it to a recommended value or a custom one set by the user.

Size is not the issue, it's placement and it truly DOES affect performance - more than you'd think (it's a very important part of the filesystem after all). And respecting MFT growth zone prevents further MFT fragmentation (of the actual file - not inside it).

I really like Diskeeper its cool and the "MFT Padding" is the reason i prefer it over PerfDis.

Size is not the issue, it's placement and it truly DOES affect performance - more than you'd think (it's a very important part of the filesystem after all). And respecting MFT growth zone prevents further MFT fragmentation (of the actual file - not inside it).

Yes, I'm aware of all that. However, PerfectDisk can only defragment the MFT, it cannot resize it. If you are using 99% of your MFT and install several programs, it will obviously become larger, and thus fragmented. of course you can just go ahead and defragment it again with PD, or have everything taken care of ahead of time with the resiziing feature in Diskeeper. I personally don't see the big deal in just letting it become fragmented since you'd defragment it immediately afterwards.

Like I said before, I just don't like doing it manually anymore. I do think PD does defragment better.

PerfectDisk actually can resize the MFT table, but it only does so when it's necessary.

Yes, I'm aware of all that. However, PerfectDisk can only defragment the MFT, it cannot resize it. If you are using 99% of your MFT and install several programs, it will obviously become larger, and thus fragmented. of course you can just go ahead and defragment it again with PD, or have everything taken care of ahead of time with the resiziing feature in Diskeeper. I personally don't see the big deal in just letting it become fragmented since you'd defragment it immediately afterwards.

The MFT "file" growing is a total non-issue if you're respecting the growth zone. It can grow a fair amount without becoming fragmented at all. There's no reason to upsize it manually like that, except perhaps very extreme cases. The only real issues I've seen WRT the MFT were oversized ones after resizing partitions - not the inverse. DK won't place it right though, which results in a slower filesystem all the time, on every single PC.

OK guys im gonna give perfdisc a trial and see if I change my mind

Offline defrag is broken in the leaked version of v8 as far as I can tell. I would advise anyone to stick to v7.

Offline defrag is broken in the leaked version of v8 as far as I can tell. I would advise anyone to stick to v7.

if you have Daemon Tools or Alcohol 120 installed you need to disable the sptd device in windows Device Manager (view - show hidden devices) to get the offline defrag to work. the virtual drives grab your drive before PD can get exclusive access...i'm sure they will fix this

I just bought 3 copies of PD8 and one copy of PD8 for Exchange. I recently evaluated PD7 and DK. PD did a much better job at defragging drives. Our data use is in the 200 - 300 GB range on each of our servers. Exchange data is much smaller.

I am running it on our test server now.

-John

Edited September 12, 200619 yr by jftuga

OK guys im gonna give perfdisc a trial and see if I change my mind

Im sticking with diskeeper untill PerDisc fixes boot time defrag