Defragmention: Windows Disk Defragmenter or Norton's Speed Disk

Which is the best at doing a effective powerful qaulity defragmention?

Windows Disk Defragmenter or Norton's Speed Disk.

windows XP one is decent.

I dont trust anything with the name Norton on it.

I use O&O Defrag.

The only Norton I liked was Ralph Kramden's best friend.
Try Diskeeper.

A vote for O&O Defrag. Windows one is inefficient, but it does its job (barely), and im with 9MM on this, I dont trust Norton anything.

I just defrag with windows version. Didn't take long to complete.

Currently defrag with Norton's righ now. It is taking along time, I think it is restructoring the data completely.

What is O&O Defrag, can you point me to a link or something.

Perfect Disk FTW!!! Its been proven to outperform Diskeeper, Norton and easily Windows.

Windows visual display of the complete defrag had many gaps of blue blocks. Show that it still not all moved to the front (fastest) part of the drive.

Speed Disk was not very speedy, took ages even on 25GB of raptor harddrive. It shows the map is now all good (in that programs opinion).

Windows Defrag map show all files move to the front of the drive with the expection of a few new reported defragmented files (red). Thats after using speed disk and compare the result.

Defrag with windows again, it changed the visual map and the defragmented files from speed disk were moved out across the drive (white block spacing).

Tryed O&O V8, it took only a ~second to defrag the prior speed disk, so that means that it must not be so different, yet funny enough I then used windows defrag, and it was done also in ~second.

Strange how all these defrag programs act in their own indivial way. Got make ya think, what really is actual best.

I believe Windows Defrag program is just a basis, dumbed down version of Diskeeper....

use O&O myself

Hmmm. Now you have me thinking about my nortons. I am running norton system works 2003. Is it really that bad?

My own personal opinion is that there is little difference between disk defragmenters. They all do pretty much the same thing. I would not likely spend extra money if I had any kind of defragger at all.

microfire, moving any files to the outer cylinders of the drive will only help performance when transfering very long buffers. In most cases seek time totally dominates IO time and seek time is actually better towards the middle of the drive.

People take fragmentation way too seriously. Most I/O access is random not sequential, meaning sequentialness matters very little. If I read block 1, then block 15, what does it matter if the file is sequential? I will have to seek anyway. Most I/O is of this nature.

The biggest major exception on a modern system is large data files, like music and movies. Just about everything else is read/write with primarily random I/O, if it's even read more than once to begin with. Many are only read once, then written out multiple times, sometimes to even a different file, which is then renamed to the original.

So, in reality fragmentation does not matter much. Definitely not as much as many people seem to think.

I don't think diskeeper does anything. I ran it on a few servers and it supposedly defragmented the drives. Uninstalled the program and the same fragmentation was still there from before. Just use the built in one and run it once a month and you'll be fine.

diskeeper is THE way and the ONLY right way. Faster and Better.

I have used it for 5+ years. Love it. Highly recommended.!