Which Disk Defragmenter?

Discussion in 'backup, imaging & disk mgmt' started by Coolio10, Sep 20, 2008.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Halo326

    Halo326 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2008
    Posts:
    106
    Perfectdisk all the way. I love the offline system file defragger.
     
  2. Coolio10

    Coolio10 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2006
    Posts:
    1,124
    Two more to add to the list of failures.

    Puran Defrag
    Smart Defrag

    Smart defrag lowered it from 17% to 15%.

    No security software is running on the computer. So nothing should be locking those files.
     
  3. Pedro

    Pedro Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2006
    Posts:
    3,502
    If JkDefrag works, and you just don't like the standard interface (or lack of it), you could try one of the GUI's available. Check the website, scroll down.

    Although you should note that you can run JkDefrag in cmd, where you have more options.
     
  4. pandlouk

    pandlouk Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2007
    Posts:
    2,976
    Hi Coolio,

    have you run a checkdisk? It seams that something is wrong with your mft.

    If there is a problem on the files table or there are bad clusters the defrag will fail/stop for not damaging your files.

    Panagiotis
     
  5. Coolio10

    Coolio10 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2006
    Posts:
    1,124
    How to run it?

    O&O did report an error before but it continued to defrag anyway.
     
  6. GES/POR

    GES/POR Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2006
    Posts:
    1,490
    Location:
    Armacham
    Puran's boottime defrag starts off with checkdisk first ;)
     
  7. Coolio10

    Coolio10 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2006
    Posts:
    1,124
    I found out how :).
     
  8. silver0066

    silver0066 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2004
    Posts:
    988
    I made the mistake of buying PerfectDisk 2008 for VmWare. After the latest update, it crashed on all three of my systems while analyzing.

    I will now try Smart Defrag and Puran.

    PerfectDisk is off my system!!

    Silver
     
  9. norky

    norky Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 1, 2004
    Posts:
    172
    Location:
    Lithia, FL
    I just started trying Puran and it's pretty nice. Works quickly and I like all the boot time options. Price is pretty darn good too. Will try it for the full period, but so far, so good!
     
  10. DiskeeperRep

    DiskeeperRep Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2008
    Posts:
    2
    Hi Coolio10,
    Don't mean to nitpick, but there is no I-FAAST in the Home and Pro editions of Diskeeper 2008. I-FAAST is found only in the ProPremier and Server editions. I-FAAST needs to monitor file activity for a while (~1 week) before sequencing the files. Benefits from I-FAAST depend on the specific system and can vary between (approx) 10-80%. All of this is done automatically without any user intervention.

    if you are interested, here is some more information on how I-FAAST works
    http://www.diskeeperblog.com/archives/2006/09/inside_ifaast.html
    http://www.diskeeperblog.com/archives/2006/11/comparing_ifaas.html

    Best regards:)
     
  11. n8chavez

    n8chavez Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2003
    Posts:
    2,896
    Location:
    Location Unknown
    MST Software just recently release version 3 of Mst Defrag. I have always liked it in the past. Has anyone used it yet? I have but I cannot tell if it is effectective or not. Any opinions on it?
     
  12. trjam

    trjam Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2006
    Posts:
    9,102
    Location:
    North Carolina USA
    Smart Defrag all the way.:thumb:
     
  13. Iangh

    Iangh Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2005
    Posts:
    820
    Location:
    Melbourne, Australia
    I tried Smart Defrag moving away from Jk.

    We have 2 Acer 2303's and I noticed that the PC was spiking at 15-20% every 3 secs on both even with the background defrag turned off. We have Avira suite on all PCs.

    Exiting SD was the answer.

    Back to Jk using JkDefragGUI to do a defrag 5mins after log-on.

    Didn't notice any change in performance.

    On my son's Dell 8300 3Ghz P4 I didn't notice any discernible spikes.

    Anybody else seeing spikes?

    Ian
     
  14. Dark Shadow

    Dark Shadow Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2007
    Posts:
    4,553
    Location:
    USA
    smart defrag.:thumb:
     
  15. silver0066

    silver0066 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2004
    Posts:
    988
    Now I am trialing O&O Defrag v11. Has almost everything that UD has, plus offline defrag. Much faster than PerfectDisk.
     
  16. Arup

    Arup Guest


    Best part is the flexible strategy to defrag, so for your boot drive you can set it to do a complete/name and for your data drive you can set it to complete/modified. The background monitoring feature is another plus, it automatically files as they are added on the fly leading to far less need of total defrags.
     
  17. icr

    icr Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2008
    Posts:
    1,589
    Location:
    Mumbai
    answers clearly on my Sig
     
  18. NGRhodes

    NGRhodes Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2003
    Posts:
    2,380
    Location:
    West Yorkshire, UK
    I am still using Diskeeper 10 Home on my remaining XP machine.

    IMHO it offers the best efficiency (measured in terms of defrag time over refragmentation and offers intelligent scheduling options and is unobtrusive.

    JK Defrag, Perfectdisk and Ultimate defrag, all reduced refragmentation rates compared to Diskeeper 10 (and XP built in defrag), but all took an un-proportional rate of time to defragment (eg Perfectdisk almost halved refragmentation, but took over 3 times as long to defrag, so I could afford to run diskeeper 10 twice as often to maintain similar levels of refragmentation and still not accumulate as much defragmentation time).

    After trying Diskeeper 2007 and MST defrag I was not keen on the realtime idea, as they seemed to spend ages defragging files that just refragmented again; though I did not run any tests, I suspect they were wasting too much time repeatedly defragging things like temp files that were continuously altered and/or deleted.

    I will mention this again as its important:

    You need to test the different defragmentation tools as some work better in different scenarios and in some cases fail to work correctly due to unique situations, there is no-one best defragmentation tool.
    Ignore the hype about performance gains, test yourself, draw your own conclusions.

    I left my hdd on my development machine for 1 full month after an initial defrag.
    It accumulated 4000 fragmented files.
    Those files had a 14% performance loss when reading end-to-end (e.g. not real world random access).
    14% performance loss sounds a lot, but that's only the fragmented files.
    My drive has approx 75000 files, that's only a total file fragmentation of 0.75%.
    Add into the mix that you seldom read a big chunk of files end-to-end, drive access is very random (I monitored frequent access to my page file in-between normal file reads/writes), XP has the cool prefetch feature, various caching mechanisms of the OS and most drives, this fragmentation is completely insignificant, it would take many months of usage before it will every become noticeable OR even affect productivity.
    But note this is a general desktop usage scenario - P2P file downloading, movie editing, some games etc. can all cause higher rates of fragmentation, but is why you need to test, so you can look at your usage and see which tool will fit in better.
     
  19. silver0066

    silver0066 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2004
    Posts:
    988
    I noticed a difference between O&O Defrag 11 and Ultimate Defrag on both of these methods.

    It appears that O&O puts the modified files on the inner part of the disk, the slowest part, rather than at the of the outer parts. UD puts them on the outer parts, the fastest part of the disk.

    Can anyone explain why O&O would do it this way?

    Many thanks,

    Silver
     
  20. Paranoid2000

    Paranoid2000 Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 2, 2004
    Posts:
    2,839
    Location:
    North West, United Kingdom
    I've trialled PerfectDisk 2008 and would give it a definite thumbs down for the following reasons:
    • Speed - it was significantly slower than Windows' own defrag, even after having run it a few times. I suspect this was due to its "Smart" placement which seemed to keep defragmenting the same files (possibly moving them to different places on disk).
    • UI - highly wasteful of screen space, due in large part to the ribbon interface - running this on a small screen would be a nightmare. Just because Microsoft does something doesn't make it a good idea!
    • Bloat - 43MB is a lot for a utility (though when installed, it took up a more modest 30MB) but it also adds two services, one of which (PD91Agent) is totally unnecessary, as it just handles scheduling. Windows' own Task Scheduler can (and should) be used for this job. The 3 background processes (PD91Agent, PD91Scanner, PD91Engine took up 15-95MB on my system, whether PerfectDisk itself (another 25MB) was running or not.
    • "SMARTplacement" - for all the brouhaha I'd expect something fairly significant. Locating large files on the outer tracks of a disk can certainly triple transfer rates in theory, yet PerfectDisk never did this. It would move some data to the centre of the drive but never to the edge (which corresponds to the end sections of the drive map) and its own performance indicators showed virtually no change over previous use of Windows' own disk defragmentation.
    On the whole, plenty of blow but little to show in my experience. :(
     
  21. Zero3K

    Zero3K Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2004
    Posts:
    374
    Location:
    Louisville, KY
  22. sasa843

    sasa843 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2007
    Posts:
    113
    Location:
    Serbia, Europe
    I would say Perfect Disk is my choice for now...
     
  23. norky

    norky Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 1, 2004
    Posts:
    172
    Location:
    Lithia, FL
    I'm torn between Puran and Smart Defrag. For some reason, Puran always opens way in the top left of my screen no matter where I close it. I still think its a great defragmenter, the window thing is just a bit annoying.


    Anyone know how to get it to save its window location?
     
  24. Zero3K

    Zero3K Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2004
    Posts:
    374
    Location:
    Louisville, KY
    Nope. I'll send them an e-mail about the problem.
     
  25. EASTER

    EASTER Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2007
    Posts:
    9,370
    Location:
    U.S.A. (South)
    I wish i knew why Smart Defrag is so different because after trying it i notice a perf0rmance difference, maybe not earth-shattering, but surely enough to open my eyes to it and because of this i'm running dangerously torn since UD by DiskTrix is been it for me for awhile now, but i must admit i am impressed!
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.