Was puzzled, different defragmenters w/ different results

Discussion in 'backup, imaging & disk mgmt' started by sweater, Apr 24, 2011.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. sweater

    sweater Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2005
    Posts:
    1,674
    Location:
    Philippines, the Political Dynasty Capital of the
    I know, I know, I know...same products with different brands produces different results. They have their own style of this and doing that. But what makes me wonder is the way they arranged and optimized the hard drives in the pc.

    When I analyzed my c drive using the built-in windows defragmenter it showed up fragmentations and it gives notice to defragment my drive. But then I used Puran Defrag to defrag that drive. After that, I analyzed it again with windows defragmenter..but it still showed up fragmentations and recommended to run a defragmentation. A bit frustrated, I was then thinking that maybe the built-in windows defragmenter will defrag it better, I then run windows defragmenter. After that I analyzed again, but still it was fragmented and some files could not be moved and it still recommend to defrag the drive. I could not believed it that even windows built-in defragger could not completely do the job. Then, I remembered that TuneUp Utilities 2011 has also a defragmenter feature. I have never used it's defragmenter for the reason that maybe other defragger is more better. Anyway, I analyzed the c drive again... using TU and it recommends to run a thorough defragmentation. I just follow what it says and run its defragger. After that I then analyzed the c drive with Windows built-in defragmenter and to my surprised the c drive was completely defragmented, no fragmentation ever. Couldn't believe it that only TuneUp Utility2011 does the job of successfully moving those unmovable files and defragmented everything in it. :argh:

    I have used several defragmenters and even Puran defrag (the fastest) but none of them could defrag as effectively like TuneUp Utilities 2011. It's the only one I've used that the windows defragmenter says after analyzed - no need to defrag the drive. :thumb:

    I was then thinking now to dump Puran Defrag and only use TuneUp Utilities 2011 defragmenter feature to defrag my drive. But I was also thinking that maybe I could just use Puran Defrag for defragging the Boot Sector. What do you think? Will it be any conflict coz they defrag in a different way? :doubt:
     
  2. Narxis

    Narxis Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2009
    Posts:
    477
    Maybe Puran is optimized your drive, not just defrag. Some optimisation methods is not like putting the files side-by-side. That is why some defragmenters think you need to do a defrag.
     
  3. J_L

    J_L Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2009
    Posts:
    8,516
    I would stick to one defragmenter, any more and you'll have conflicting results.
     
  4. doktornotor

    doktornotor Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2008
    Posts:
    2,047
    Yeah indeed, each of these tools may implement different strategies and different view of what it considers to be fragmented. Test one at a time, stick with whatever you consider best.
     
  5. Sherlock_Holmes

    Sherlock_Holmes Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2010
    Posts:
    1,449
    Location:
    Mumbai
    U didnt try auslogics and defraggler
     
  6. sweater

    sweater Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2005
    Posts:
    1,674
    Location:
    Philippines, the Political Dynasty Capital of the
    I've been using those also in the past. ;) Yes, they're good and defrag ok.

    What I was looking for is a defragmenter/s that after it finish defragging the drive Windows built-in defragmenter's analysis will says that the Hard Drive is ok and there's no need to defrag. I still trust the analysis of the windows built-in defragmenter coz it's the system own organ, nothing less nothing more. Although, I don't use windows own defragmeter coz it's slow and not as efficient and fast like others. :cool:
     
  7. PJC

    PJC Very Frequent Poster

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Posts:
    2,959
    Location:
    Internet
    -Did you try PerfectDisk?
    -Did you try Diskeeper?

    If Freeware is Not what you are looking for...
     
  8. napoleon1815

    napoleon1815 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2010
    Posts:
    702
    I find this too (different results) and agree that settling on one makes the most sense. I have also used one and analyzed with another...sometimes they agree, sometimes not.
     
  9. Spruce

    Spruce Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2010
    Posts:
    291
    Don't forget the poor forgotten O&O Defrag :'(

    Zone Filing is nice :cool:
     
  10. napoleon1815

    napoleon1815 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2010
    Posts:
    702
    Spruce,

    That is what I use...no issues with it at all. Based on many others I have used (paid and free), it tends to be on the slower side BUT the most thorough.
     
  11. DOSawaits

    DOSawaits Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2008
    Posts:
    416
    Location:
    Belgium
    Even Windows built-in defrag will flag optimized partitions, which contains no fragmented files but free spaces inbetween as fragmented. Just trust the defragger of your choice.
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.