Perfect Disk

[Jeremy]

i liked perfect disk, but have no use for any kind of defragger now though

Anyone running a Windows based PC can always benefit from a defragmenter.

[dcyphure]

i liked perfect disk, but have no use for any kind of defragger now though

Anyone running a Windows based PC can always benefit from a defragmenter.

i use deepfreeze, no files are ever physically moved

[Jeremy]

I see, well the majority of users are always creating, changing, deleting, uninstalling, etc...

DeepFreeze is most practical on workstations in cybercafe for example.

But if you do none of that stuff than cool.

[Zxian]

i use deepfreeze, no files are ever physically moved

That's not true at all... DeepFreeze just restores the file contents - not the file locations. You still need to defrag when you're using DeepFreeze.

[RJARRRPCGP]

About Page Defrag, it appeared that Windows 2000 accepted the pagefile when Page Defrag was done defragmenting then when at the login screen, used the shutdown menu to reboot Windows 2000. If I log in right after it was done defragmenting, then Windows 2000 will complain about the pagefile being corrupted and disable it! In short, if I don't reboot again before logging in, the error message saying that the pagefile is corrupted pops up and Windows 2000 disables the pagefile.

Edited September 15, 2006 by RJARRRPCGP

[rms]

This defrag thing is just showing, how easy it is to fool people.

No doubt, PerfectDisk does the job.

But, just think how not serious is to 'smart' place files according to last modified date. Even if it could theoretically really reduce further fragmentation, it is just plain wrong, and not very 'smart'. After installing some OS update, all updated files will be moved to back of the drive, whereas they should actually be moved to beginning.

Otherwise, Windows defrag also does the job just fine.

Another thing (and everybody can test it) is boot file optimization, which is ON by default.

Just run smart placement defragmentation, and check boot time.

Then, change boot optimization to 'let Windows manage' and run Windows defrag. Note that it removes all PD 'boot files' from beginning of disk, and places other files at beginning. After that, check boot time again.

On every XP machine I have tried, Windows defrag wins at least 10 seconds of boot time!.

It is true for PD7 and also PD8.

Their support replies like that - if feel you have better boot perfomance with PD not managing layout ini files, you have an option to disable it.

Well, luckily I have option not to buy that software, too.

[Tarun]

Considering the speed of the hard drives, it doesn't matter if they're at the beginning or end of the drive. It's the same read/write time. The real thing that changes boot time speeds for sure is the amount of programs you have starting up and the RPM of the hard drive. Placement doesn't really matter.

[RJARRRPCGP]

Considering the speed of the hard drives, it doesn't matter if they're at the beginning or end of the drive. It's the same read/write time. The real thing that changes boot time speeds for sure is the amount of programs you have starting up and the RPM of the hard drive. Placement doesn't really matter.

Unfortunately, that isn't true. The beginning of the HDD is faster than the end. All disk utilities that measure the MB/s shows that. Most HDDs have a major speed drop when at the end.

Edited September 17, 2006 by RJARRRPCGP

[Tarun]

Do you have proof that it is incorrect? If so, I will look into it.

[RJARRRPCGP]

Do you have proof that it is incorrect? If so, I will look into it.

If you check the HDD speeds with HDTach.

Or MHDD, which is a low level diagnostic utility, which is available at hddguru.com.

If you choose the scan function or watch the KB/s when wiping a hard disk drive.

It appears that no matter what, it's never as fast on the other end of the platter.

But they can vary.

It seems that all the HDD manufacturers can do is to reduce the speed drop when going to the other end of the platter.

Edited September 17, 2006 by RJARRRPCGP

[rms]

Here is what it shows for Seagate 320GB.

Edited September 17, 2006 by rms

[Takeshi]

But, just think how not serious is to 'smart' place files according to last modified date. ...

Another thing (and everybody can test it) is boot file optimization, which is ON by default....

Your post makes sense to me and is very well articulated.

Many people think just because they've done something it must be better.

Moving files around according to some criteria doesn't seem smart to me either. It's a bit like shifting furniture in the room.

Regarding boot file optimisation, do you know what files are actually moved by PD and Windows? Boot files are boot files, so why the difference? Do they see boot files differently?

[Jeremy]

I've switched back to PerfectDisk because the SIAFI and IFAAST features of PerfectDisk don't appear to be anything more than automated defrags initiated when a certain point of overall fragmentation on the drive occur. PerfectDisk can do essentially the exact same thing by being scheduled to run a full pass defrag, for example, when you're sleeping.

The full-pass defrag will take longer or shorter depending on how fragmented the drive is at the time. It may take 5 minuites, maybe 5 hours. Also, SmartPlacement adds to the time.

Is it is true that access times get worse as you near the end of the disk, than SmartPlacement is always the best option if you're concerned about time in milliseconds.

Anyway, bottom line, I think the features are hyped about so much, people think they need this and that just to have their files in order and defragged. Not true.

Also, about the workload your HD goes through. Either defrag 5 times a day with Diskeeper without "Smart" or use PerfectDisk once at night with SmartPlacement to put everything in order at the beginning of the disk where the HD's mechanical reader requires less time and effort to go to the files. If you have two files defragged by DK and they are at the beginning and end, the reader has to travel from one end to the other. Why not have them side by side? Makes sense, no?

[Zxian]

If you have two files defragged by DK and they are at the beginning and end, the reader has to travel from one end to the other. Why not have them side by side? Makes sense, no?

Not really... that's the whole point about I-FAAST. It orders the files that WILL be accessed in sequence together. When you analyze the drive with I-FAAST, and then such a defragmentation pass occurs, the primary and secondary defrag methods will respect the relative placement of the files.

Take the following example - you've got a 100GB drive. 60GB of it is filled with your system and files.

Scenario A

You defrag the drive using PerfectDisk's SmartPlacement, so that all the system files are at the front, and then your data files (since chances are your data files were put on the disk after your system). Now you go to Windows Update and install the patches for Patch Tuesday. The new files, as per SmartPlacement, would be put at the END of the drive, since they are relatively new, and would be tagged as "frequently modified" (times modified/time). So now, to load Windows, your system needs to read most of the files from the beginning of the drive, and then those few updated files at the end of the drive, and then probably go back to the beginning for more files there.

Scenario B

You let Diskeeper defrag the drive using I-FAAST. It places all the system files together in one region of the disk, and then the other files in another region. You go and update Windows as before. Two things are different than in (A). First, I-FAAST defragmentation will still recognize that those updated files still belong close to the other system files, and it will place the updates closer to the rest of the system. Secondly, chances are there's enough space for the updates to simply be moved there without the need for the defragger to move other files out of the way.

Your system isn't going to need to access shell32.dll, and then an MP3 file one right after the other all that often now is it? Explorer.exe and shell32.dll - those two should to be close together though. PefectDisk doesn't ensure this while Diskeeper will.

[Jeremy]

Well, it's a trade-off then...

You either go with PerfectDisk to have all your files side-by-side for fastest access time,

or

You go with Diskeeper which will place files at the beginning and end of the disk and just leave huge gaps in between files.