Found a really good disk defragmenter..free to use!

wolfman

O&O Defrag has always been a favourite of mine.

NTFS will become fragmented over time due to the nature in which it works, although definitely not as much as something like FAT32.

The performance hit will effect data access/read/write related. Plus you're hard drive will have to work harder. I used to set O&O to do a quick defrag once a week. It'd only take 5-10 minutes each time, nothing long and would keep everything in good shape.

SunnySusie

hbl wrote: »

Hey, Windows comes with a perfectly good disk defrag tool... :P Haha, I'm surprised that wasn't the first thing someone said! Thanks for the tip though, will check it out (I love the freebie software, especially stuff that replaces MS cack).

re-read the post! The OP is not wrong either, the Vista one is indeed a pile of pants!

albertross_2

jkdefrag uses the windows defrag api, so it is just a different front end to the defrag routines already built-in to the o/s.

As others have said, defragging is overrated, with modern disks.

BillScarab

"Plus you're hard drive will have to work harder" This is the bit I don't get, a fragmented disk has to work harder so to fix it you a defrag that works the disk really hard!

I must admit to defragging occasionally when I have one of my 'must clean up the PC' moments delete lots of crap but I'm not sure it's that necessary anymore.

baby_frogmella

When i was using Win XP i found the built-in defragmenter sufficient BUT the one in Vista has 2 major issues (in my opinion):

1) It uses less CPU power so it takes longer to defragment. Apparently MS designed it that way so that you can run other programs at the same.

2) There is no progress indicator, so you don't know if it has 5 mins left or 5 hours left to run.

As for the need to defragment your hard disk, that all depends on how intensively you use your computer. Personally i find a noticeable diffrence on my pc after each defragmentation...fragmentation occurs especially when you install/unsinstall programs frequently.

mjr600

http://www.iobit.com/

Have a nice free defragger which runs in the background, Windows Care is free from them too.

wolfman

BillScarab wrote: »

"Plus you're hard drive will have to work harder" This is the bit I don't get, a fragmented disk has to work harder so to fix it you a defrag that works the disk really hard!

Yes, but that's a one off.

If you don't defragment, it'll constantly be having to work harder than normal. Every time it reads or writes.

It's a myth that NTFS doesn't need defragmenting. It will do (or at least the MFT will), maybe not as soon as something like FAT or FAT32, but it will need it eventually due to how it places data on the disc. The more data you move or change, the sooner you'll need to defragment.

nullogik

Yes, Norton has its venerable Speedisk, which came bundled with Norton Systemworks. It was an OK defragmenter, but was only a little faster than the built in one in XP but was a lot more thorough.

I very much recommend Diskeeper. Its not free but its incredibly fast, much faster than XP's or Speedisk and really does make a difference with regards to performance - you do actually notice the performance difference after defragging. It also has more flexibility for scehduled defrags, and has a number of special features which reorganise you're files so that the most used ones are prioritised on the HD. The statistics are very comprehensive and has to be my top buy from last year!

Well Recommended!