Hi, This is an inquiry into the benefits of O&O vs DK10. I have both, and have used O&O for a longer time, but DK10 has this FAAST feature I was interested in. Supposedly, FAAST moves the most accessed files to another portion of the disk for quicker response times. The problem I had with O&O was that it showed a total of 12% fragmented, but the numbers didn't add up. example: 76,340MB total, 39,224MB free, 39,261 files, 12 frag files = 12.02% fragmented... that's not even 1% by my addition. So I tried DK10 and it was more thourough in it's overall speed, and showed more "believable" figures. But this FAAST feature interests me. After a week of using DK10, it finally analyzed the files I used more often, and defragged the files, but moved them all over the disk, telling me it was a 16% improvement to allocate them this way. For the heck of it, I used O&O to "see" what changes were made, and there are huge gaps between the files. I have all my games on another drive, and the DK10 said there would be minimal increase on that drive for enabling FAAST (< 2%) so I only use it on C:\. Is it better to have all files close to one another as O&O does, or to seperate them as DK10 does? I am interested in other's interpretations as to wich is "better" for their purposes. Thanks for replies.