Jump to content


 


Register a free account to unlock additional features at BleepingComputer.com
Welcome to BleepingComputer, a free community where people like yourself come together to discuss and learn how to use their computers. Using the site is easy and fun. As a guest, you can browse and view the various discussions in the forums, but can not create a new topic or reply to an existing one unless you are logged in. Other benefits of registering an account are subscribing to topics and forums, creating a blog, and having no ads shown anywhere on the site.


Click here to Register a free account now! or read our Welcome Guide to learn how to use this site.

Photo

Disk Defrag Vs Defraggler


  • Please log in to reply
15 replies to this topic

Poll: Disk Defrag Vs Defraggler (1 member(s) have cast votes)

Auslogic's Disk Defrag or Piriform's Defraggler?

  1. Defraggler (1 votes [100.00%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 100.00%

  2. Disk Defrag (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#1 fleamour

fleamour

  • Members
  • 297 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:UK
  • Local time:04:49 PM

Posted 28 February 2011 - 12:39 AM

Bit strange this but Piriform's Defraggler claims 45% fragmentation whereas Auslogic's Disk Defrag claims 0% fragmented.

Surely one must be inaccurate?
ASRock Conroe (micro ATX) - Ubuntu 12.04/Win 7 Ultimate (x86)
Intel C2D E8400 3.0GHz/low profile Noctua (single fan)
4GB OCZ DDR2 RAM, GeForce GT220 1024MB

Vintage IBM-T21 laptop, Xubuntu Lucid LTS
512MB KingSpec RAM, 1GHz CPU [T22 Fan], Wireless-G PCMCIA, 7200RPM HDD

BC AdBot (Login to Remove)

 


#2 Platypus

Platypus

  • Moderator
  • 13,667 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Australia
  • Local time:01:49 AM

Posted 28 February 2011 - 12:45 AM

45% fragmentation would be enormous. What does Windows Defrag analysis report?

Top 5 things that never get done:

1.


#3 fleamour

fleamour
  • Topic Starter

  • Members
  • 297 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:UK
  • Local time:04:49 PM

Posted 28 February 2011 - 12:48 AM

23%
ASRock Conroe (micro ATX) - Ubuntu 12.04/Win 7 Ultimate (x86)
Intel C2D E8400 3.0GHz/low profile Noctua (single fan)
4GB OCZ DDR2 RAM, GeForce GT220 1024MB

Vintage IBM-T21 laptop, Xubuntu Lucid LTS
512MB KingSpec RAM, 1GHz CPU [T22 Fan], Wireless-G PCMCIA, 7200RPM HDD

#4 fleamour

fleamour
  • Topic Starter

  • Members
  • 297 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:UK
  • Local time:04:49 PM

Posted 28 February 2011 - 12:58 AM

Drive C:

Defraggler: 6%
Win Native: 3%
Auslogic: 4%
ASRock Conroe (micro ATX) - Ubuntu 12.04/Win 7 Ultimate (x86)
Intel C2D E8400 3.0GHz/low profile Noctua (single fan)
4GB OCZ DDR2 RAM, GeForce GT220 1024MB

Vintage IBM-T21 laptop, Xubuntu Lucid LTS
512MB KingSpec RAM, 1GHz CPU [T22 Fan], Wireless-G PCMCIA, 7200RPM HDD

#5 Platypus

Platypus

  • Moderator
  • 13,667 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Australia
  • Local time:01:49 AM

Posted 28 February 2011 - 01:04 AM

45%, 23% and 0%... I wouldn't know which one to believe... :)

Edit: Oh, what was the 45% figure actually for? 6% sound more reasonable.

Personally I've always liked the Auslogics defrag. Will it run if it analyses fragmentation as 0%?

What can happen if you use more than one defragmenter is each one will want to undo what the other did, because their defragmentation strategy is different. Depending on what options are set in each, they might be reporting more than simply file fragmentation. Defragmenters can do more optimising than just file defragmentation, and might be basing analysis figures on a different set of processes.

Edited by Platypus, 28 February 2011 - 01:06 AM.

Top 5 things that never get done:

1.


#6 fleamour

fleamour
  • Topic Starter

  • Members
  • 297 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:UK
  • Local time:04:49 PM

Posted 28 February 2011 - 01:08 AM

The first set of percentages is for fragmentation of my back up disk D. Disk C does not vary so wildly.

Edited by fleamour, 28 February 2011 - 01:10 AM.

ASRock Conroe (micro ATX) - Ubuntu 12.04/Win 7 Ultimate (x86)
Intel C2D E8400 3.0GHz/low profile Noctua (single fan)
4GB OCZ DDR2 RAM, GeForce GT220 1024MB

Vintage IBM-T21 laptop, Xubuntu Lucid LTS
512MB KingSpec RAM, 1GHz CPU [T22 Fan], Wireless-G PCMCIA, 7200RPM HDD

#7 Platypus

Platypus

  • Moderator
  • 13,667 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Australia
  • Local time:01:49 AM

Posted 28 February 2011 - 01:15 AM

OK. Fragmentation isn't a great problem for a backup drive. All fragmentation does is increase the access time a bit for a file. For files accessed frequently like Windows system and application files, or files that stream at a sufficient data rate like videos, it can be significant. A fraction of a second in doing a backup or restoring something isn't going to be worth the time, effort and extra drive wear to justify defragging, IMO.

Top 5 things that never get done:

1.


#8 fleamour

fleamour
  • Topic Starter

  • Members
  • 297 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:UK
  • Local time:04:49 PM

Posted 28 February 2011 - 01:20 AM

OK, makes sense, I shoulda known that! SSDs & flash USB I knew not to defrag.
ASRock Conroe (micro ATX) - Ubuntu 12.04/Win 7 Ultimate (x86)
Intel C2D E8400 3.0GHz/low profile Noctua (single fan)
4GB OCZ DDR2 RAM, GeForce GT220 1024MB

Vintage IBM-T21 laptop, Xubuntu Lucid LTS
512MB KingSpec RAM, 1GHz CPU [T22 Fan], Wireless-G PCMCIA, 7200RPM HDD

#9 Platypus

Platypus

  • Moderator
  • 13,667 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Australia
  • Local time:01:49 AM

Posted 28 February 2011 - 01:37 AM

SSDs & flash USB I knew not to defrag.

True.

Top 5 things that never get done:

1.


#10 Bill R TechSpec

Bill R TechSpec

  • Members
  • 14 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Local time:07:49 AM

Posted 02 March 2011 - 04:18 PM

I am a Tech Specialist at Diskeeper Corporation, so I may be able to shed some light on this situation.

I would guess that Defraggler is including the system files in its analysis while the other one is ignoring those.

Free defragmenters canít defragment system files so many of them donít even bother reporting them.

Fragmentation in any form hurts performance so I suggest you check out Diskeeper for a more thorough solution.

There is even a free trial at http://www.diskeeper.com

#11 Platypus

Platypus

  • Moderator
  • 13,667 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Australia
  • Local time:01:49 AM

Posted 03 March 2011 - 03:58 AM

I am a Tech Specialist at Diskeeper Corporation

I will cheerfully enquire of Diskeeper whether your claim is true, and if it is I will ask that they prevent you from spamming forums with debateable claims in their name as you are currently doing.

Top 5 things that never get done:

1.


#12 FlannelBack

FlannelBack

  • Members
  • 327 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Local time:11:49 AM

Posted 03 March 2011 - 02:28 PM

I would guess that Defraggler is including the system files in its analysis while the other one is ignoring those.

The above may be true but I beg to differ with this:

Free defragmenters canít defragment system files

A couple off the top of my head.
PageDefrag old but worthy.
Puran Defrag Free Edition, which is what I use, works quite well actually. Defraggler is showing 0% fragmentation at the moment and I haven't done a manual defrag in quite some time.

#13 fleamour

fleamour
  • Topic Starter

  • Members
  • 297 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:UK
  • Local time:04:49 PM

Posted 03 March 2011 - 02:59 PM

Oooh, defrags system files, download the goodness!
ASRock Conroe (micro ATX) - Ubuntu 12.04/Win 7 Ultimate (x86)
Intel C2D E8400 3.0GHz/low profile Noctua (single fan)
4GB OCZ DDR2 RAM, GeForce GT220 1024MB

Vintage IBM-T21 laptop, Xubuntu Lucid LTS
512MB KingSpec RAM, 1GHz CPU [T22 Fan], Wireless-G PCMCIA, 7200RPM HDD

#14 Bill R TechSpec

Bill R TechSpec

  • Members
  • 14 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Local time:07:49 AM

Posted 03 March 2011 - 08:44 PM

Guys, I was just trying to help....

I really don't see anything wrong with trying something for free to see if it's a good fit or not.

Sorry if the previous post rubbed anyone the wrong way.

I assure you all that my only intention is to help.

#15 Bill R TechSpec

Bill R TechSpec

  • Members
  • 14 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Local time:07:49 AM

Posted 03 March 2011 - 08:47 PM

I would guess that Defraggler is including the system files in its analysis while the other one is ignoring those.

The above may be true but I beg to differ with this:

Free defragmenters canít defragment system files

A couple off the top of my head.
PageDefrag old but worthy.
Puran Defrag Free Edition, which is what I use, works quite well actually. Defraggler is showing 0% fragmentation at the moment and I haven't done a manual defrag in quite some time.


Good point -- I should have said "Some Free defragmenters....". Sorry and thanks for pointing that out!




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users