UltimateDefrag - is this the best defragger ever?

There are many methods, and you can mix and match the ones that best make your disk/system snappier, but this is my most common useage.

First foremost i exclude Recycler/System Volume Information if in use along with some other folders that are rarely used.

I first do a simple files defrag then go in TOOLS/OPTIONS and select HIGH PERFORMANCE 70/ARCHIVES 30 AUTO setting.

Then i use RECENCY/OPTIONS with "Last Accessed", Place Data On Outer Tracks/Most Recent Data Most Outer then "Respect High Performance"/"Complete High Performance Then Stop"/"Respect Archive"/"Put Directories Close To MFT"

You can strategically make file placement work to your system's best benefit by using UltimateDefrag's many features such as CONSOLIDATE/VOLATILE etc. and experiment with combination of these.

I try to EXCLUDE these same files/folders after placement when possible so they don't drift too far away after some useage.

My computer is never been more crisp and responsive.

 

Sorry I don't understand this. I thought excluding meant that any file excluded would not be processed by the program ? and that when a file is used it basically ends up where it wants - which is how drives become fragmented ?

This program does seem to have all the bells and whistles anyone could possibly want - I would like to like it but as I can get no measurably benefit perhaps I'm not configuring it correctly ?

 

On my workstation i place app. i daily use on the outer edges,rest of the other stuff near the spindle,finished !! Note i'm talking about a workstation,on a machine for general purpose i guess configure maybe different,but the helpfile put you on the right track.

 

I tried a new de-frag arrangement and it seems to be working quite well:

First: Defragmented Files Only or manually defragment individual files. My most severely fraged files are Outlook.PST

"Consolidate" all options except Stop.

For "High Performance" 50% Auto and putting ".exe, .dir, .dll" in File Types
"Custom" $ISR\0

For "Archive" 50% Auto and "Custom" all $ISR except \0 and all WinRar variants or whatever you would want to archive in File Types (I don't change SS often, so I'm better off archiving my "extra" FD-ISR SS)

For "Exclude" Recycle, SysVol, & $NTUninstall

UD started to choke on moving $ISR\0 but it was accomplished.

...screamer

 

You can see by reading other members methods above UD is Xtremely flexible and you can actually experiment with several ways untill you realize the results that show the best performance for you.

I took advice posted earlier i think in this very topic that after MOVING certain files/folders for strategic placement to then also EXCLUDE them from further defrag which in turn prevents from having to repeat over and over again defragging the same programs.

I'm not much help i know in explaining it clearlyt and thats one of my limitations but others here can and will do a better job at detailing EXACTLY what you are looking for and the easiest & best way to go about that.

To avoid confusion, yes, EXCLUDE folders/files is one of the FIRST settings recommended and i normally pick the common ones such as System Volume Information, Recycler, and even $ISR although it's reported not needed, i prefer to Defrag the "active" snapshot that i'm in at the time to reduce time and thats why i exclude $ISR folder completely. I then can do a Copy/Update to archive with a freshly Defragged snapshot. It's just a personal practice of mine to save time especially if the $ISR folder is holding several snaps because those are COMPLETE systems with many files/folders etc.

 

Better late than never ? Finally got UD to work and will not be going back to PD.
so for me UD is now the best defragger ever - that is until a better one comes along.

 

I'm glad you find it useful.

I tried really hard to find confidence/performance with the others but nothing seemed as fast and effective as UltimateDefrag for me.

Experienced serious issues with PD that shocked me away from it and with DiskKeeper it seemed to do ok for awhile but i didn't care for it running in the background. Don't know if i could or should turn that running process off or not, but i didn't plan on an on-the-fly defragger running all the time.

UD seems to be the perfect medium for me, just right, no problems, and quicker system/files response.

I finally got rid of the Prefetching and that speeded up my boot times now, and they said Prefetch was supposed to do that, for me it's been the opposite so i've jotted down the reg hack to turn it off for now on.

 

One thing what throw me in is their manual,never saw such a comprehensive tutorial on diskmanagement,very enlightening stuff !

 

[thread title]

................... i believe so, does exactly what it says on the tin.

+ support is lightning fast
+ the manual is very helpfull as was rightly mentioned in the previous post

 

Does anyone know if the picture of the drive means much. I have C: for windows and programs with high performance data almost covering the outer edge of the disk. Archive data is then at the center of the drive. Then I have data on another drive. Again the high performance just covers the outer edge of the drive. Does the image/picture that we see really represent the actual disk ? and is it better to have only one ring of data rather than 2 or 3 ?

 

I tried every method in the book, and yet the yellow reserved for MFT was always shown as being on the outer section, and every single defrag operation still told me I was 34.78% fragmented and it never decreased, So what the Heck

 

I need some guidance and suggestions too.

When i first started using UD you could plainly make out the PURPLE high-performance files on the wheel.

Since then i don't even see any colors for Hi-Perform anymore.

Can someone point me to the settings to set this Hi-Performance where it shows up on the disk wheel so i know for certain just where my Hi-Performance files are positioned?

Thanks, and yes this version is new and makes a tendency for me to lose my bearings given the MANY features included in it now.

I want to set Hi-Performance files to the out rim of course, then lock them there with Options/Excluded Files.

Thank You Sincerely. EASTER

 

Has anyone got any benchmarks that show any performance improvement compared to other defraggers ?

 

nickr - how would you benchmark ? I have a subjective feeling that UD is now snappier than PD but not much else. RegSeeker now runs 8% faster but that could be co-incidence. Previously when I opened outlook I had a white screen for a second or so. No this no longer happens.

3 things I have noticed (1) It takes a few days for UD to settle down. (2) It is not difficult to confuse the program by stopping mid defrag and changing settings - can easily screw up. (3) Changing files from compressed to uncompressed seems to play hell with the file date system.

when it comes to different methods I don't think any of them are as important as the idea of archiving old unused files and sticking them out of the way.
Once the optimal balance is achieved it is as though you are dealing with a much much C: smaller and well organized C; at that. Same goes for data - old zips, old files are just pushed to one side and ignore. I would imaging that most people will have experienced a new lightly loaded pc and remember how much faster it was than later when all the junk had built up. This is what UD can do if set up that way. The defrag bit is just the same as any other - it is the high performance/ achieve split that makes the difference.

 

Take an image.
Select some files, benchmark by timing how long it takes to read (various tools on the net), repeat numerous times to get a good average.
Defragment with tool.
Benchmark again on same files.

Repeat with different defrag tools...

One thing to note is that with benchmarking executables and dll's you will be timing the prefetch files.

FYI I have some benchmarks for a few tools and have seen positive results from the tools that put more effort into file placement, but the negative is the longer defrag times.
Not had chance to write them up yet as got a broken arm and typing one handed takes ages...

 

Did they get rid of offline defrag in the 2008 version? It's mentioned in the FAQ but there's no checkbox in the options.

 

there is an option under tools/schedule/add job...... but it doesn't work. still waiting for an add on module to allow boot time defrag I understand ?

 

I've just purchased this for my computer,but I haven't give it a run.It can't be to complicated to figure out is it?This will be ran on Vista.I should do myself a favor and read this whole thread.

 

Hi Guys. I'm from Disktrix. This is one very popular thread so I think it's time we frequently visited the forum and answered any questions you may have about the program. I can't guarantee we'll answer all, and to your satisfaction, but we'll do our best.

In answer to this comment about boot time.... yes we have currently excluded boot time defrag from UltimateDefrag 2008. We had initially planned to include it with this version but time simply ran out. The main module was ready well ahead of the boot time.

We're still at the alpha build with the boot time defrag but we do expect it to be ready in 6 weeks. We are, of course, giving it free to all licensed users.

There's not going to be too much that you won't be able to do with the boot time module. It will have both a manual and intelligent mode that lets you place whatever metafiles and system files you want wherever you want on the hard drive. Intelligent mode will of course place those files optimally.

 

There's a product called readfile (http://www.winimage.com/readfile.htm). This will measure data transfer performance for reading files from your hard drive.

A good way to test the theory of the difference in performance for files placed at the outer tracks compared to inner tracks is to select a folder and place it in the high performance area - 3 to 5 Gb of data should suffice. Run readfile on those files.

Then place that same folder to the very inner tracks (with archive). Reboot your system and run readfile again on that same folder which is now in the inner tracks.

You will clearly see around a 180% to 200% performance difference.

As far as testing performance across the entire drive - it is a hard one to do unless you can specifically choose which files.

We do have a utility on the todo list that will be able to benchmark the difference in performance you will see from a drive optimized using our methods and just a plain defragged drive. But again... that remains on the todo list.

 

WELCOME! Rob_F

Thanks for your attention.

Simple question, if we are to move archive files more and more to the inner track then does that by constrast equally accellerate the High Performance files on the outer tracks to even better boost overall disk/system performace?

An exceptional Defrag product i must add in compliment. The positive results speak for themselves i think.

EASTER

 

The other thing to test is how quickly the drive refragments after usage depending on how files are placed during defragmentation.

 

Yes absolutely. At the end of the day - the better the "seek confinement" you achieve with your high perfomance files the better their performance since there is a narrower band of hard drive head travel. It's all about how far from each other the most frequently used files are that determines how fast they are found and accessed. Of course there is a point where a limit is reached and that is track to track seek time. A random seek can not be less than the quoted track-to-track seek time for a drive - usually 1 to 2 mS.

When you go to the AUTO option and drag the slider all the way to the right. This is the percentage of files to the outer tracks that gives you average access that approximates track-to-track seek times for a drive.

 

The fact is that drives fragment - otherwise we wouldn't need to defrag. The rate of refragmentation is a function of the number of files that are modified and number of new files written to the drive.

Generally speaking the only files that fragment are those files that change and new files that are written to the drive. But this of course causes fragmentation of the file system itself.

PerfectDisk has a great strategy for handling this with its SmartPlacement algorithm. This makes the defrag process pretty fast and it does "localize" refragmentation to only a small area of the drive. So this is a very good approach. But this does not necessarily promote performance of the drive beyond what eliminating the fragmentation does.

Our way of handling this refragmentation with the most efficiency is in-place defragging. If you use the consolidate method, UltimateDefrag, most of the time, only moves the fragments and joins them to the non-fragmented portion of the file. It does this while eliminating free space between files.

So if you are watching UltimateDefrag you may see a large fragmented file that is say 20 blocks of red. When the defrag routine gets to that file, you'll see it pretty much instantly change to blue. This is inplace defragging. It didn't touch the 20 red blocks but simply added the fragments to this contiguous larger part of the file. So instead of moving 600 Mb - it may have only moved 3 Mb in its effort to defrag that file. All while working to eliminate all free spaces between files.

Also since most files on a drive are destined for archive - rarely used and rarely modified and placed out of the way then the only part of the drive that gets fragmented are those that aren't in archive. So the HP and regularly used files make up a smaller fraction of the drive and so the defragmentation process only has to deal with 10 to 20% of what it normally would have to across a whole drive. Thus refragmentation is handled pretty quickly.

 

Still doesnt defrag MFT, Metadata hibernation file, or Page file (YET) Though