• 0

Definitive Best Defragmenter 2008

Asked by kinetix63,

 Share

Definitive Best Defragmenter  

866 members have voted

  1. 1. Your choice?

    • Auslogics
      54
    • DirMS/Buzzsaw
      1
    • Diskeeper
      184
    • JKDefrag
      101
    • Norton Speed Disk
      5
    • O&O Defrag
      119
    • PageDefrag
      1
    • PerfectDisk
      224
    • Vopt
      5
    • Windows Defrag
      97
    • Other (please specify below)
      75

Question

136 answers to this question

Recommended Posts

  • 0
Grand Master

+Mystic MVC

Posted
  • MVC
Posted

Diskeeper for me. All other defragmenters have below par intelligent, automatic background defrgmentation. PerfectDisk comes close, but it isn't efficient in the sense, it uses too much resources over too little time, thus making performance dips quite obvious. With Diskeeper, you won't notice a preformance drop while a defrag is going on, even on very low end PCs. (I've been running Diskeeper for years on my old 450 Mhz box quite comfortably)

Sure, if you do a manual run, you may find PerfectDisk / O&O / UltimateDefrag to be better, but Diskeeper isn't designed to be run manually.

All those benchmarks that are available at present only tests the defragmenters for a single or atmost two sessions or runs. Those tests only show which defragmenter works the best on manual defrags.

Automatic, background defragmentation tests should be conducted over a period of time, like a week or a month; only then can we know which automatic defragmenter is the most efficient. Note that the keyword here is efficient - meaning delivering maximum performance while using the least amount of resources.

Although, fragmentation is highly overrated these days. With large harddrives becoming cheaper and large media files occupying the maximum space, fragmentation isn't much of a problem once your system is well setup. Again, this is highly subject to your enviromnent and your requirements. Database servers might benefit from Diskeeper w.r.t the performance aspect, but home users might find Diskeeper to be overpriced for their general needs.

Personally, I use UltimateDefrag immediately after a fresh format+install. I manually edit the layout.ini to add ntldr, boot.ini and ntdetect.com at the top of the list. (Why doesn't windows add it in the first place?!) Then I go on about adding files that I don't use frequently to the bottom of the drive (driver.cab, sp2.cab, help files, dllcache, and so on), while I move programs that autostart with windows to the top of the drive. Sometimes, I take the assistance of bootvis to figure out the program loading sequence.

Once the manual drive layout optimization is done UltimateDefrag finishes all tasks, I quit it for good and enable Diskeeper. And that's the last time I'll be opening a defragmenter again, untill the next format cycle comes along :)

My personal advice to all readers: Please don't go blindly by the results of this poll. First, assess your situation and decide whether you would *really* benefit from a dedicated third-party defragmenter. Vista users have their work cut out thanks to the builtin automatic defragmenter, but first assess whether it's working well for *you*. Check your fragmentation levels. Are they low on an average or tend to shoot up every time you install something? Do the drives you use frequently have more than sufficient free space? (If so, fragmentation won't be a problem for you.) Fragmentation of audio/video files isn't a big deal since they're always read (played) at a constant speed. 3 or 4 fragments of a 700 MB movie file wont affect your playback experience. Unless of course, you have some other files, like programs installed in the same partition. Then again, it's never a good idea to keep your programs and media on the same partition, for the above and many other reasons. If program loading time is your main concern, then invest in a good flash drive and make use of ReadyBoost. (eBoostr, for Windows XP users.) If low startup time is what you seek, then disable unnecessary startup programs/services and make use of the Sleep / Hibernate features.

Defragmenters can only take you a certain distance in the journey to optimizing your computer.

Don't just jump to conclusions based on some xyz benchmark or personal opinions. Decide for yourself what would suit your scenario the best. On that note, I'd like to say that there is no such thing as a "Definitive Best Defragmenter", just as there is no "Definitive Best Car".

Great post, there is a lot of solid information in there that a lot people don't even consider nowadays.

I also fixed your post (in bold) that kept me laughing as well. :D

I use the normal Windows XP defragmenter.

  • 0
Mentor

digital vibe

Posted
Posted

Diskeeper for me. All other defragmenters have below par intelligent, automatic background defrgmentation. PerfectDisk comes close, but it isn't efficient in the sense, it uses too much resources over too little time, thus making performance dips quite obvious. With Diskeeper, you won't notice a preformance drop while a defrag is going on, even on very low end PCs. (I've been running Diskeeper for years on my old 450 Mhz box quite comfortably)

Sure, if you do a manual run, you may find PerfectDisk / O&O / UltimateDefrag to be better, but Diskeeper isn't designed to be run manually.

All those benchmarks that are available at present only tests the defragmenters for a single or atmost two sessions or runs. Those tests only show which defragmenter works the best on manual defrags.

Automatic, background defragmentation tests should be conducted over a period of time, like a week or a month; only then can we know which automatic defragmenter is the most efficient. Note that the keyword here is efficient - meaning delivering maximum performance while using the least amount of resources.

Although, fragmentation is highly overrated these days. With large harddrives becoming cheaper and large media files occupying the maximum space, fragmentation isn't much of a problem once your system is well setup. Again, this is highly subject to your enviromnent and your requirements. Database servers might benefit from Diskeeper w.r.t the performance aspect, but home users might find Diskeeper to be overpriced for their general needs.

Personally, I use UltimateDefrag immediately after a fresh format+install. I manually edit the layout.ini to add ntldr, boot.ini and ntdetect.com at the top of the list. (Why doesn't windows add it in the first place?!) Then I go on about adding files that I don't use frequently to the bottom of the drive (driver.cab, sp2.cab, help files, dllcache, and so on), while I move programs that autostart with windows to the top of the drive. Sometimes, I take the assistance of bootvis to figure out the program loading sequence.

Once the manual drive layout optimization is done UltimateDefrag finishes all tasks, I quit it for good and enable Diskeeper. And that's the last time I'll be opening a defragmenter again, untill the next format cycle comes along :)

My personal advice to all readers: Please don't go blindly by the results of this poll. First, asses your situation and decide whether you would *really* benefit from a dedicated third-party defragmenter. Vista users have their work cut out thanks to the builtin automatic defragmenter, but first asses whether it's working well for *you*. Check your fragmentation levels. Are they low on an average or tend to shoot up every time you install something? Do the drives you use frequently have more than sufficient free space? (If so, fragmentation won't be a problem for you.) Fragmentation of audio/video files isn't a big deal since they're always read (played) at a constant speed. 3 or 4 fragments of a 700 MB movie file wont affect your playback experience. Unless of course, you have some other files, like programs installed in the same partition. Then again, it's never a good idea to keep your programs and media on the same partition, for the above and many other reasons. If program loading time is your main concern, then invest in a good flash drive and make use of ReadyBoost. (eBoostr, for Windows XP users.) If low startup time is what you seek, then disable unnecessary startup programs/services and make use of the Sleep / Hibernate features.

Defragmenters can only take you a certain distance in the journey to optimizing your computer.

Don't just jump to conclusions based on some xyz benchmark or personal opinions. Decide for yourself what would suit your scenario the best. On that note, I'd like to say that there is no such thing as a "Definitive Best Defragmenter", just as there is no "Definitive Best Car".

Well said. I use Diskeeper, I have been for 6 months and it works outstanding.

  • 0
Veteran

PermaSt0ne

Posted
Posted

JKDefrag

i add / delete / move around a ton of large files all day long (no not pirated movies :p ) JK being 64-bit helps the speed quite a bit when defraging

and when i use it on my C: i notice huge increases in speed when windows boots and logs on

as well it has lots of different types of defraging and options of what and how to defrag stuff

  • 0
Enthusiast

leo_the_lion

Posted
Posted

Tried several of the free variants and most were adequate but I found none of them really made much difference but then I tried PerfectDisk 8 and wow!......boot up time and the general responsiveness of my XP machine improved dramatically. Great product and would recommend anyone try the 30 day free trial to see if they notice the difference too. Good to hear version 9 will be here soon too. :)

  • 0
Experienced

solardog

Posted
Posted

Diskeeper for me. All other defragmenters have below par intelligent, automatic background defrgmentation. PerfectDisk comes close, but it isn't efficient in the sense, it uses too much resources over too little time, thus making performance dips quite obvious. With Diskeeper, you won't notice a preformance drop while a defrag is going on, even on very low end PCs. (I've been running Diskeeper for years on my old 450 Mhz box quite comfortably)

That why I use it. Its just excellent in this regard.

  • 0
Collaborator

npe

Posted
Posted

The first time I used JKDefrag I thought to myself why would anyone make something with a UI that bad? A year later I tried JKDefrag again and just amaze with the program. Now all my computers are defrag using this program. It's best to run in Safe Mode; in this situation the computer can't be used for anything so there is no point to even sit there and look at the UI to see how ugly it's. The program is simple to use, light, does what it suppose to do without doing anything extra. Definitely one of the best freeware and must have program out there.

  • 0
Community Regular

GoldenSheep

Posted
Posted

Voted for Perfectdisk 8... waiting impatiently for 9 to see the changes.

Two weeks ago, I ran a manual defrag with PerfectDisk 8. I had about 56 fragments left, I started up Diskeeper right after and turned on auto-defrag, and fragshield. Currently, Diskeeper 2008 is still running, but I've checked on a daily basis with Diskeeper that the amount of fragments on my computer's still going up. I have almost 2000 fragments... which I suppose is ok... but slightly disappointed that it wasn't able to deter fragments on my computer. Also, the constant "defrag" on my harddrive is slightly annoying, it constantly read/writes to my harddrive so my harddrive constantly makes noise. I will continue to use Diskeeper until my trial is over, then I will make a final decision whether I want PD9 or DK.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to question listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.