Are all defraggers created equally? - Overclock.net

Bennylava · 04-21-09

Got a couple defrag questions for yall.

1. Are they all pretty much the same? Is one going to possibly do a better job than another? I have heard of a "deep defrag" that is supposed to be different from a regular defrag.

2. What is your opinion of the stock windows defragger that comes with vista?

3.Is there ever anything that is actually deleted during a defrag, or are things just moved around?

4. Does defragging ever cause wear? I have heard that the "deep defrags" can actually do this. And as such should only be done once or twice during a HDD's life.

Captain Han · 04-21-09

defrag is overrated.

1. they are based on the same principle but different program have different algorithms which they think gives better performance. Like some defrags boot file and arranges them to the fastest part of the drive, while others don't.

2. Stock vista defrag is good. It is also automatic and acts as a background task so you don't have to worry about manually defraging the drive (you don't even notice it)

3. no

4. using your drive causes wear, defrag is using your drive so ya lol but its not harmful. Like people say how doing full format harmfully wears the drive its not true.

just leave the vista defrag program on default setting and you'll be fine

TwoCables · 04-21-09

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bennylava

Got a couple defrag questions for yall.

1. Are they all pretty much the same? Is one going to possibly do a better job than another? I have heard of a "deep defrag" that is supposed to be different from a regular defrag.

2. What is your opinion of the stock windows defragger that comes with vista?

3.Is there ever anything that is actually deleted during a defrag, or are things just moved around?

4. Does defragging ever cause wear? I have heard that the "deep defrags" can actually do this. And as such should only be done once or twice during a HDD's life.

Unfortunately, they're not all the same. There are awesome ones, and there are bad ones. But it's not like the bad things make things worse. They just do an okay job instead of an excellent job.
The Windows defragger is probably the worst one ever created.
As far as I know, nothing is ever deleted during a defrag. Things are organized just the same as you would neatly organize your room or something so that things are MUCH easier to find (so that you find them quicker).
Now you have me worried that my daily defragging is causing wear. lol Sorry, but I didn't know about this possibility, so now I'm wondering the same.

For me, IOBit's Smart Defrag is the best defragger I have ever used. I like it so much that I can't remember what I've used besides JkDefrag. And it blows JkDefrag away and makes it look pathetic. I use the "Deep Optimize" defrag every single day right before shutting my system down, and it only takes like 5-10 seconds. As a result, my system is snappier. It feels like it's going as fast as it can, at least concerning this.

The first time I ran Deep Optimize, I was afraid because it says that "it may need more time". I expected it to take an hour. But it took 5 minutes to do my entire HDD. Yes. 5 minutes. This defragger is extremely fast, and does an exceptionally good job. I have never liked a single piece of software so much.

Darren9 · 04-21-09

Everything TwoCables said, I use IOBits SmartDefrag also and think its the best there is.

DuckieHo · 04-21-09

Quote:

Originally Posted by TwoCables

Unfortunately, they're not all the same. There are awesome ones, and there are bad ones.
The Windows defragger is probably the worst one ever created.
As far as I know, nothing is ever deleted during a defrag. Things are organized just the same as you would neatly organize your room or something so that things are MUCH easier to find (so that you find them quicker).
Now you have me worried that my daily defragging is causing wear. lol Sorry, but I didn't know about this possibility, so now I'm wondering the same.

For me, IOBit's Smart Defrag is the best defragger I have ever used. I like it so much that I can't remember what I've used besides JkDefrag. And it blows JkDefrag away and makes it look pathetic. I use the "Deep Optimize" defrag every single day right before shutting my system down, and it only takes like 5-10 seconds. As a result, my system is snappier. It feels like it's going as fast as it can, at least concerning this.

The first time I ran Deep Optimize, I was afraid because it says that "it may need more time". I expected it to take an hour. But it took 5 minutes to do my entire HDD. Yes. 5 minutes. This defragger is extremely fast, and does an exceptionally good job. I have never liked a single piece of software so much.

Actually, I would agree more with Captain Han.
1) They are different but it really doesn't matter. The performance difference is marginal between the best and worst. Load/Shutdown times are affect but general use isn't.
2) MaxPC found that the native Vista defragger was the best one for performance even though it was slow. (Again, difference wasn't much).

Can you prove or test "my system is snappier"?

http://www.maximumpc.com/article/the...rag_difference

Quote:

Don’t Waste Your Money or Time!
You shouldn’t break the bank for negligible performance gains

With all of the benchmarking completed, we find it rather suspicious that disk defragmentation did nothing to improve the performance of our machine. However, we must note that our test drive was not terribly fragmented to begin with due to Vista’s auto-defragger running on our test bed. Even the paid-for programs were unable to yield any positive gains—quite the opposite, in some instances

Enigma8750 · 04-21-09

I like JKDefrag.

http://filehippo.com/download_jkdefrag/

The Mad Mule · 04-21-09

Quote:

Originally Posted by DuckieHo

2) MaxPC found that the native Vista defragger was the best one for performance even though it was slow. (Again, difference wasn't much).

http://www.maximumpc.com/article/the...rag_difference

Ah, there it is; I read about that awhile ago, so I've stuck with the Windows Defragmenter for awhile. But last night I installed the latest version of O&O, just because I like seeing those little colored blocks and a percentage meter.

TwoCables · 04-21-09

Quote:

Originally Posted by DuckieHo

Actually, I would agree more with Captain Han.
1) They are different but it really doesn't matter. The performance difference is marginal between the best and worst. Load/Shutdown times are affect but general use isn't.
2) MaxPC found that the native Vista defragger was the best one for performance even though it was slow. (Again, difference wasn't much).

Can you prove or test "my system is snappier"?

http://www.maximumpc.com/article/the...rag_difference

The only proof I have is that I have actually felt a difference. I'm not a benchmarking kind of person yet.

So, I guess what I like the best about Smart Defrag is how extremely fast it is. It defrags my entire volume in just a minute or two while the Windows defragger takes significantly longer.

SLeeZeY · 04-21-09

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Mad Mule

Ah, there it is; I read about that awhile ago, so I've stuck with the Windows Defragmenter for awhile. But last night I installed the latest version of O&O, just because I like seeing those little colored blocks and a percentage meter.

God damn I missed clusters being moved, I would watch it literally for hours