I've used Perfect Disk, Ultra Defrag III and am now using O&O Defrag Professional Edition 12.5.
I like it since they have the COMPLETE type of defrag that sets the harddrive (works best for the systemdrive) into three zones.
Bootfiles in the first zone.
Installed stuff in zone two.
Everything else in zone three.
This is supposed to be better than what other defraggers do but I'm not sure....a defrag takes like 30min but it's never 'done'. It also hangs often.
In the zone options there's this option of putting every file that's bigger then x into zone 3 and so I've put it at 1GB (default was 512MB). Hope it was the right choice but I'm a bit afraid that I'll mess things up.
I used Ultra Defrag III before but that program had many options which I never understood nor did I WANT to take the time to understand everything about it.
My systemdrive has lots of games and programs installed and that's the drive that's important.
I have win 7 ult. It defrags automatically per my schedule setting. ( when I'm sleeping) I check every so often, always at 0% fragged.
You use the built in defrag tool?
Smart Defrag 2 for me too.
There is. Its called Glary Utilities instead.
Same here.
Of course, I have that too. And CCleaner. Just a glutton.
None. Use Windows defrag.
Doesn't the built in defrag program take to long and use too many resources?
I've used it once or twice and it doesn't take that long, just doesn't have the options like the other choices out there.
Yes and has no optimizer.
Tis true. No optimizer.
I Use tune up (2011suite )set and forget
I really like Diskeeper. Run it in the background mode. Keeps fragmentation minimal and does not eat into the system resources to slow down the pc during the defrag. I use my pc for gaming as well as photo editing and it does get fragmented really bad. OF the programs I have tried, Diskeeper works the best for me.
All you guys running the defrag programs in the background I have to ask this. Isn't it better to defrag once in awhile weather than have constant defragging? Wouldn't constant background defragging cause premature wear on the drive?
YEP.. I don't really care if it's using resources while I'm sleeping. It works just fine too.
I reg clean regularly. I strongly disagree with not doing that! Not from a performance standpoint (although it does do wonders for that), but due to a quirk of MS with the registry. It seems that if the registry gets too big, it will not load - which means windows will not load! I found that out on a client's machine 8 years ago. Microsoft knows about this "quirk"but I have yet to see any KB on it.
As for deleting temporary files, I agree again. However doing so leaves gaps in the hard disk that defragging nicely optimizes which cuts down on file load times, System paging times, and file seek times (seeking all the pieces parts).
Until Bill Gates can prove to me that defragging is harmful, I will continue to do it.
On a regular drive? No, it is running whenever the machine is on, so defragging is not adding anything to the issue.
When I'm on windows (at work mostly) I tend to use MyDefrag: http://www.mydefrag.com/; it uses the internal Windows API, but sorts items into zones, and seems to have a positive effect (especially if I'm using a PC for the first time and the previous user didn't defrag)
Once in a while I use Pagedefrag: http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/sysinternals/bb897426; it cleans out the pagefile during startup - it tends to be something I use *only* when I first inherit a PC and very occasionally afterwards (In my experience Pagefile crud just doesn't build up that fast).
Linux ext3/4 partitions just don't seem to have defrag issues, I understand it has to do with smarter placement of files on disk - files that need to expand are given extra room, et al, but that seems to obvious to be the whole answer.
Jonnan
I have used Diskeeper for years and IMO it is the best.
Also, many ITs I have spoken to (some of whom run huge networks with thousands of machines) swear by Diskeeper (and several software comparison studies concur - here's a recent DigZip Software Review: http://www.digzip.com/software/2011/03/15/ ).
Diskeeper is fully automatic and it does not drain system resources. And it is the only defrag program that prevents fragmentation (Here's a Top 10 Review about these features: http://disk-defragmenter-software-review.toptenreviews.com/diskeeper-professional-review.html.)
As a result, my disks have to work a lot less when writing files as well as in accessing them (I read somewhere that files can be written in thousands and even thens of thousands of pieces, which is a lot of disk activity in both writing and reading. Obviously, less disk use = less wear = lasts a lot longer = less $$ in premature disk replacement -- do the math).
I agree with Dr Guy about the benefits and all I can say is that my disks last years longer than users I know who don't defrag (and even longer than those who use the built-in or freebies).
What about machines that are still in use but to old and do not have the resources to handle background full time defragging?
I use Puran Defrag. It runs automatically. I never know it is there. Just set it and forget it. I have tried all those mentioned aboue and for me Puran Defrag is great. Price=FREE!
Yes constant defragging will in fact cause premature wear of the HD. That is fact. Unecessary read/writes = unecessary wear. That said, it is not a bad idea to force a "defrag" once in a while after software has been uninstalled or files moved deleted so that the filesystem is in a less fragmented state before installing something new.
However, BY FAR the better thing (better than constant defragging) to do with a windows based system is to ensure AT LEAST 20% free space on a drive at all times. This will ensure less wear and tear on the drive when actually doing a defrag and will also allow for a more continguous file structure to begin with. I always maintain at least 40% free space on my HD's (if I need more space I buy bigger drives) and this helps to keep my drives fast and clean (defrag is most effective with drives not much more than 50% full). Drives that are over 60% full are not ever really defragged anyway. Lots of read/writes only to put one or two sectors of data next to each other? How's that for wear and tear?
the Monk
EDIT: Oh and since like I said the actual result of running a defrag (ie. how continguous or not your filesystem is AFTER a defrag) is directly in correlation to how much free space the drive has to work with I find the windows defrag more than adequate at keeping my drives as organinzed as can be.
TuneUp Utilities.
PerfectDisk all the way. Tried Defraggler and some others in the past but none come any where near PD
I use Auslogics Defrag...my son turned me on to it a few years back. IMO, it is the best out there, for me, at least! I defrag about once a month, as I do a lot of graphics design and websites, and things tend to get scattered all over the place!
FYI, if there are a lot of typos here, please forgive me...I had cataract surgery yesterday and my vision is all messed up right now...lol. I get my other eye done next week, so I have to live with messed up vision till then.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
Sign in or Create Account
