Which is the best defragmenting software?

[Net]

And you've got numbers to prove that it's not just a placebo affect?

i didn't clock it but after i download anther 30 gb i'll clock it if you want lol.

i could get up and grab something off my bed before firefox would load up. usually the case when i have a ton of fragments. after defraging it loads instantly.

my words might not mean much to you but here is some technical data you can read.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File_system_fragmentation
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defragmentation

do people really disbelief that fragmentation doesn't have an effect on performance?

 

[Nothinman]

Does it help read times?

Only long, sequential reads which are rare compared to random access.

do people really disbelief that fragmentation doesn't have an effect on performance?

Not absolutely 0 affect but something appreciable? No, not usually.

 

[4444]

I'm looking for a defragger aswell. Plenty to choose from, all with their own idea what the best way is to defrag.
What I want is a defragger for my storage drives, all folders placed one by one in one end and all the free space on the other side.
Is there a defragger that places the folders alphabetically?

 

[Nothinman]

Is there a defragger that places the folders alphabetically?

And you care how directory entries are sorted in the MFT why?

 

[4444]

Because when I play an album I don't want my drive to jump all over the place.

 

[lxskllr]

Originally posted by: 4444
Because when I play an album I don't want my drive to jump all over the place.

Why does it matter? I'm trying to think of a downside, but I'm drawing a blank.

 

[Nothinman]

Because when I play an album I don't want my drive to jump all over the place.

Seeking is going to happen no matter what and you can't stop it. If your player doesn't buffer enough data to not skip then you need a better player. If you just don't like watching the light blink so much put some tape over it.

Every directory entry lookup has to hit the MFT because that's where they're stored. Only after the metadata is retrieved from the MFT does the system know where in the filesystem the actual data is so that it can seek there and begin paging it into memory. You're going to seek between the data and the MFT no matter what, you can't change that.

 

[4444]

So what's the point to defragging then? Why bother at all?

 

[Nothinman]

So what's the point to defragging then? Why bother at all?

I argue that point all of the time. Most people think it's necessary but no one seems to be able to produce any hard evidence that it's actually beneficial. I think most of them just like to watch the colors move around on the screen while their hard disk churns.

 

[Random Variable]

I let Smart Defrag defrag in the background. My HDD seems more responsive, but I don't have any empirical evidence that it actually is more responsive.

What I'm convinced does nothing is registry defragging.

 

[Nothinman]

I let Smart Defrag defrag in the background. My HDD seems more responsive, but I don't have any empirical evidence that it actually is more responsive.

And this is the typical response. They say it feels faster but can't prove that it actually is faster. There's just too many variables to be able to prove either way. Usage patterns, filesystem cache, running processes, etc all affect the results.

 

[raincityboy]

Originally posted by: Nothinman

So what's the point to defragging then? Why bother at all?

I argue that point all of the time. Most people think it's necessary but no one seems to be able to produce any hard evidence that it's actually beneficial. I think most of them just like to watch the colors move around on the screen while their hard disk churns.

I not a big fan either, but I believe it could improve the chance of data recovery. If your mft(s) gets borked, and you defragment often then you have a better chance of getting more data back.

 

[GrumpyMan]

After I defrag my drives I notice and immediate improvement. I weigh less, shaved a couple of years off of me age wise, much more handsome and taller too!
J/Kidding....I do defrag once in a great while but notice no speed increase in anything I do afterwards.

 

[Steve]

Defragging is better than Acai berry for cleansing my colon.

 

[Soundmanred]

I stopped wasting time with defragging in 2002.
I have alot of drives (80GB, 4x 200GB, 320GB, 3x 500GB, 3 x 1TB externals) and I don't have any problem with anything being "slow".
Unless they go to sleep and I wake them of course.
(All drives are at or near capacity other than the 320GB, I don't use it for much.)
Maybe I'll defrag my OS drive and report back on the "results".

 

[0roo0roo]

it used to matter more with old slow drives of the past.
now whether you actually feel any noticeable difference in real world use is questionable. most people can probably get by with defrag once a year if that..with the built in defragger.

 

[PepePeru]

i like defraggler, its free and you can select the files you want.

 

[Nothinman]

i like defraggler, its free and you can select the files you want.

And being able to micromanage your defrag tool helps you how?

 

[martensite]

The defrag arguments continue....lol.

I can't recall when was the last time I manually defragged any of the drives; I've left Diskeeper on automatic defrag mode since I installed it, and it handles everything. Never had a problem with it.

Don't bother with micromanaging defrag..not worth the time.

 

[Zillatech]

Originally posted by: Nothinman

I let Smart Defrag defrag in the background. My HDD seems more responsive, but I don't have any empirical evidence that it actually is more responsive.

And this is the typical response. They say it feels faster but can't prove that it actually is faster. There's just too many variables to be able to prove either way. Usage patterns, filesystem cache, running processes, etc all affect the results.

I notice the difference when a system is well defraged vs. not. How about after a large service pack? I'm very sensitive to system performance and even thou I don't sit there and benchmark disks to prove it, I can "Feel" the difference. I have worked on many machines with no defragmentation and damn, the are slow as hell compared to the systems I run at my work (very similar specs). I haven't used anything but Diskeeper since I'm old school w/ computers and Diskeeper has always worked well. MS licensed DK's tech. for Windows 2000 along time ago but Diskeeper has vastly improved it over the years. I like the fact that now it just works all the time w/ zero impact on performance while I'm working & I never have to worry about disk fragmentation on any of the machines I work on. The computers I support also run AutoCAD heavily which fragments the hell out machines so its very important in my environment to keep the machines running in top performance.

My 2 cents, for what its worth ~

It sounds like Perfect Disk is another good choice but I have never used it. At least there is another good player in the market to keep Diskeeper on their toes

 

[j0j081]

I don't bother anymore either in fact there were actually a couple times when after defraggin Vista hard drive performance seemed worse for regular windows use. I'm guessing the program I used messed up how Vista's built in defrag had organized it.

 

[George P Burdell]

Originally posted by: Andvari
To put it in simple terms, it's like this:

PerfectDisk does like an ULTRA defrag, whenever you tell it to. Heavy duty, on demand.

Diskeeper kinda does a lot of mini-defrags, all the time. Lightweight, consantly working in background. Set it and forget it.

Well put. This is exactly why I picked PerfectDisk over Diskeeper. I run PD about once every 30-60 days. No background tasks hogging memory or I/O cycles. PD also pools all the free space together, which reduces fragmentation in new files.

 

[masterbm]

I use perfectdisk one advantage of any windows defrag you defrag just one file or the entire drive. You can also defrag the sytem files which window defrag will not. also you setup to defrag hd when it get above certain fragmention plus you can set how high priotry you want. On my media center / file server thsi important you would not want the system to sto defrag while watching something cause video to skip. Aslo I for the record only the os drive every really defrag in that system history it derfag the other 5 drive about every 8-15 months

 

[Rottie]

i use both diskkepper and defragger I like diskkepper's set and forgot so it runs in the background you dont see any noticable slowdown (or maybe because my computer is too fast) it also set schedule for defrag without tell me or remind me. I use defragger on my vista notebook defragger is so small and clean but it is slow not fast as diskkeeper.

 

[Nothinman]

I'm very sensitive to system performance and even thou I don't sit there and benchmark disks to prove it, I can "Feel" the difference.

And my car feels faster after I wash it...