• 0

Definitive Best Defragmenter 2012


Definitive Best Defragmenter 2012  

200 members have voted

  1. 1. Your Choice?

    • Auslogic
      26
    • DirMS/Buzzsaw
      0
    • Diskeeper
      24
    • JKDefrag
      8
    • Norton Speed Disk
      0
    • O&O Defrag
      18
    • PageDefrag
      0
    • Vopt
      2
    • Windows Defrag
      32
    • PerfectDisk
      33
    • Defraggler
      43
    • Smart Defrag
      3
    • Paragon Total Defrag
      0
    • Other (please specify)
      11


Question

Recommended Posts

  • 0

It's not really necessary with regular disks either. even if another one is better than the windows built in one, it's not gonna matter one iota.

I don't see why these threads are made, it just keeps the illusion alive that people still need to defrag and use third party tools for it.

  • 0

The best defrager is MyDefrag which is the successor of JKDefrag:

Most defragers even slow down the disk...

Benchmark of all Defragers:

http://hofmannc.de/d...chmarks_en.html

MyDefrag:

http://www.mydefrag.com/

MyDefrag is extremely solid because it is based on the standard defragmentation API by Microsoft, a system library that is included in Windows 2000, 2003, XP, Vista, 2008, and Win7. Most defragmenters are based on this API, including the free defragmenter that comes with Windows and many commercial defragmenters. Basically all MyDefrag does is send "move this file to that location" commands to the API. The API is part of the operating system and can safely move almost any file on the disk, without risk and while the computer is in full use.

Right from the MyDefrag site, basically I've seen this statement before and what it seems to say is, no matter what Defrag app you are using it still uses the API from Windows, essentially comes down to how efficient the APP is at sending the commands and how fast it is at doing so. Otherwise you are getting the same result from all defrag apps, except the real-time ones like DIskeeper which prevent the fragmentation on regular HDD's from happening in the first place.

  • 0

Right from the MyDefrag site, basically I've seen this statement before and what it seems to say is, no matter what Defrag app you are using it still uses the API from Windows, essentially comes down to how efficient the APP is at sending the commands and how fast it is at doing so. Otherwise you are getting the same result from all defrag apps, except the real-time ones like DIskeeper which prevent the fragmentation on regular HDD's from happening in the first place.

Not exactly.

The API's expose different routines and not one like "DefragTheDrive" or "DefragTheFile".

Youre able to get the fragmentlocations and place the file on another location or defragment it.

What MyDefrag is doing is, it reads the prefetchdata to know what libraries an app is loading and the lastaccesstimes and even defrags files in a folder to be next to each other.

Also MyDefrag lets you modify/create scripts to defrag the things you want, in your way, or simply share/download good scripts.

  • 0

I know it shouldn't enter into it, but having just installed MyDefrag and after it finished defragging I was faced with a screen looking like this http://www.mydefrag.com/img/Snapshot2.gif - sorry but that is just plain butt ugly and even from a defragger I expect something on my screen which 1) looks good and 2) just from its visual display I can see whether or not my drive needs degragging and on those account5s MyDefrag is a fail.

  • 0
Otherwise you are getting the same result from all defrag apps, except the real-time ones like DIskeeper which prevent the fragmentation on regular HDD's from happening in the first place.

It's not quite that simple - something a lot of people are forgetting is that you can never properly defragment a Windows (or any other OS with the exception of Linux) properly on the fly - the only way to get a full defragment including OS files+hiber+page is to either do it from an external boot source (DVD/CD/USB/Another OS) or by doing it pre-boot which for example O&O Defrag offers.

Also you can select various optimization methods which can boost your gaming performance quite a bit (Complete Name/Access/Modified for example - especially useful in games that have massive number of small files).

  • 0

You really, really should not defrag an SSD. You're simply wearing down the drive for no reasonable benefit of any kind - defragmenters were designed for mechanical drives for a good reason, with a solid storage drive it has none.

  • 0

I used to use perfectdisk but i come to recently realize that the windows defrag has been much optimized since the days of XP (go figure (derp) :p) and now that works just fine for me :)

  • 0

It's not really necessary with regular disks either. even if another one is better than the windows built in one, it's not gonna matter one iota.

I don't see why these threads are made, it just keeps the illusion alive that people still need to defrag and use third party tools for it.

Even NTFS still fragments, and with large HDDs and partitions, defragmentation still matters. (Seriously - how many of you with what were considered *midsized* HDDs back just two years ago - 250GB and larger - broke them up into multiple partitions? Given the small default cluster size of even large NTFS prtitions, there's far less reason to have a multi-partition large drive.)

I actually still don't have an SSD yet (primarily because I haven't finished my Sandy Bridge-based build; I still have, at minimum, CPU and motherboard left to purchase), and an SSD is extremely far down on the list of priority purchases even *after* the build gets done. Further, I've moved from a 500GB (467GB formatted capacity) boot drive to a 1TB (931GB formatted capacity) boot drive - I wouldn't have multiple *partitions* except that 7 x64 has a System Reserved partition by default. Due to the new drive having a far larger on-drive cache (32MB vs. 8MB), I've actually gained in terms of performance, despite the far larger partition size.

Because I have multiple file-types on a single drive/partition, fragmentation affects some file-types more than others - therefore, defragmentation is still a necessary. That's why Diskeeper remains part of my utility arsenal.

That said, looking at the future of Windows, Diskeeper (in fact, all third-party defragmenters) are under siege - Disk Optimizer (in the Windows 8 Developer Preview) is a massive game-changer in that it takes one feature that has been unique to third-party tools (defragmentation of the swapfile and MFT) and brings it back into the main set of options; even more surprising, Disk Optimizer includes multi-pass no-reboot defragmentation - which no third-party degragmentation utility - including Diskeeper - does today.

  • 0

Other.

Not really neccessary these days with evolution of SSDs

There is a benefit when you consolidate free space because some cells that are only half filled can not be "trimmed". If you use PerfectDisk it will fill in all the half filled cells in a unique way that enhances speed and the life of the drive. All this allows the SSD to "Trim" more efficiently.

  • 0

Even NTFS still fragments, and with large HDDs and partitions, defragmentation still matters. (Seriously - how many of you with what were considered *midsized* HDDs back just two years ago - 250GB and larger - broke them up into multiple partitions? Given the small default cluster size of even large NTFS prtitions, there's far less reason to have a multi-partition large drive.)

And windows regularly auto defrags your drives. and you're nto going to notice ANY performance difference, even at the nanosecond level between the different defragmenters.

  • 0

And windows regularly auto defrags your drives. and you're nto going to notice ANY performance difference, even at the nanosecond level between the different defragmenters.

How much money are you willing to bet on that?

Because I can prove you wrong instantly by comparing, for example, SC2 or BF3 loading times with built-in windows defrag vs O&O.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Posts

    • Cjam 2.5.0.0 by Razvan Serea Cjam is a lightweight and fast MP3 editor for Windows that lets you cut, join, and edit MP3 files without re-encoding. This means your audio quality remains untouched, and edits happen instantly. Cjam is ideal for quick, lossless edits—whether you're trimming music, combining tracks, or preparing audio for learning tools or podcasts. It features batch processing, scripting support, cue and playlist file handling, and a simple interface. Cjam is perfect for anyone who needs efficient MP3 editing without the complexity of full audio suites. Cjam requires a PC running Windows 10 or later and Microsoft .NET 6.0 or later. Key features for Cjam: No Re-encoding: Edit MP3 files without losing quality. Cut and Join MP3: Easily cut, trim, and combine MP3 tracks. Batch Processing: Edit multiple files at once for faster workflows. Scriptable Interface: Automate tasks with a custom command language. Cue and Playlist Support: Handle CUE and playlist files for seamless audio management. Fast and Lightweight: Quick processing with minimal system resources. Lossless Audio Editing: Ensure your edits don't affect audio quality. Simple User Interface: Clean, intuitive design for easy navigation. File Format Support: Works with MP3, Cjam-specific file formats (CJAMC, CJAMJ, CJAM). Cjam 2.5.0.0 changelog: Added clipboard-based import/export support for mp3DirectCut Added clipboard-based export support for REAPER Added support for naming IMP3 elements Changed the Reset behavior to preserve Undo/Redo history; use Shift key + Reset button to clear it Added a new command parameter (qcp) Added 8 new entries to lang.txt (main_c124-126, main_d150-151, main_m082, vme_c014, vme_d005) Fixed a bug where the il parameter was incorrectly applied when pasting VMP3s into the main list Fixed several other minor bugs Download: Cjam 2.5.0.0 | 1.4 MB (Freeware) Links: Cjam Home Page | Cjam Manual | Screenshot Get alerted to all of our Software updates on Twitter at @NeowinSoftware
    • WTF! Nah, not this one. If you were back then using computers in the 90s or you had a clue, you'd know this was huge and was seen and overused absolutely everywhere and you'd take this article as no more than a retrospective story. That's all it is.
    • these "editors" get paid by the amount of articles and not the quality of content; hence why we get this random stuff from the same "editor" time and time again.
    • 256 times the quality of an audio cd? I think audio cd's sound good so even twice as good as that would be something.
    • It’s not about the NOx. It’s about the electrical field.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Dedicated
      JuvenileDelinquent earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • First Post
      DrWankel earned a badge
      First Post
    • Reacting Well
      DrWankel earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • Week One Done
      Supreme Spray LV earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      Genuinetonerink- Dubai earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      504
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      163
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      91
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      75
    5. 5
      Michael Scrip
      72
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!