• Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!

Best Disk Defrag Software - 2007

Overclockers is supported by our readers. When you click a link to make a purchase, we may earn a commission. Learn More.

Which disk defragmentation tool do you prefer?

  • Windows Built-in

    Votes: 46 15.8%
  • Raxco

    Votes: 28 9.6%
  • Ashampoo

    Votes: 2 0.7%
  • O&O

    Votes: 54 18.5%
  • DisKeeper

    Votes: 95 32.5%
  • DiskTrix

    Votes: 6 2.1%
  • Other (Please list)

    Votes: 40 13.7%
  • I use Linux, baby!

    Votes: 21 7.2%

  • Total voters
    292
Status
Not open for further replies.
Diskeeper but tonight, Perfectdisk because Vista won't shrink my partition because Diskeeper and Vista defragger won't defrag system files. Seems to do a very good job of it but I don't normally need my disk defragged that well so not worth the money for me.

Speaking of Linux, is this why Linux seems to write and read slower than Windows? Because Windows just throws the files anywhere convenient while Linux takes its time to sort them as it writes? Is this why Linux doesn't need defragging?
 
Has anyone heard of Golden Bow's Vopt? Golden Bow has been around since early 90 and dos. Full support just about any OS, defrags the pagefile, shows you any temp files that can be deleted and is relatively fast (how fast is your hdd - raptor/raid-0 here). They've a month free trial with free incremental upgrades but total version change is discounted. It also has "Zeroing" free space to wipe out anything left over. I work on a machine, use VOPT to clean-up and then remove it.
 
I use Linux,baby! lol

But I wish there was a way to defrag my external drive via native Linux. Sadly I can't emulate windows defrag appilcation through wine.
 
Just a FYI in regards to the built-in defrag utility in Vista, but besides the documented switches available from the command line (from Vista's built-in help file)...

Code:
Microsoft Windows [Version 6.0.6001]   
Copyright (c) 2006 Microsoft Corporation.  All rights reserved.   
  
C:\Windows\system32>defrag /?   
Description:  Locates and consolidates fragmented files on local volumes to   
              improve system performance.   
  
Syntax:  defrag <volume> -a [-v]   
         defrag <volume> [{-r | -w}] [-f] [-v]   
         defrag       -c [{-r | -w}] [-f] [-v]   
  
Parameters:   
  
Value         Description   
  
<volume>      Specifies the drive letter or mount point path of the volume to   
              be defragmented or analyzed.   
  
-c            Defragments all volumes on this computer.   
  
-a            Performs fragmentation analysis only.   
  
-r            Performs partial defragmentation (default). Attempts to   
              consolidate only fragments smaller than 64 megabytes (MB).   
  
-w            Performs full defragmentation. Attempts to consolidate all file   
              fragments, regardless of their size.   
  
-f            Forces defragmentation of the volume when free space is low.   
  
-v            Specifies verbose mode. The defragmentation and analysis output   
              is more detailed.   
  
-?            Displays this help information.   
  
Examples:   
  
defrag d:   
defrag d:\vol\mountpoint -w -f   
defrag d: -a -v   
defrag -c -v

... there's also two undocumented switches available:

-i The –i switch makes Defrag run in the background and operate only if the system is idle - as it does when run as a scheduled task. If you want to perform the scheduled defrag early, use this switch, but leave it off if you’re defragmenting a disk as part of major file operations.

-b The –b switch optimizes boot files and applications while leaving the rest of the drive undisturbed.
 
Yea it does seem to run slow, but at the same time I don't usually do things while I am defragging so RAM usage is of little importance to me. But what I really getting at is, exactly why and what it doesn't do well while defragging.

I don't completely understand the whole defragging process, but to me it would seem like all the programs have the same goal, which is removing fragments from the drive. So no matter what the program is, they all have the same objective which is removing fragments. But what it sounds like is the other programs do it faster and with less resources, but in the end still do the same job which is remove the fragments.

:confused:

The whole idea of a Defragmentation is to do it quickly and relatively painlessly, with use of fewest resources...if you've got a defragmenter that can defragment while you're doing other stuff, then good stuff.

Windows defragment completely f***ed this up with most, if not all, of their defragmenters especially Vista defragment...that thing is aweful. I sat at my PC using it and i had to leave it for over a day, and it still hadn't finished. The main problem, is that it doesn't tell you the percentage done...
 
Diskeeper Lite was the freeware version of one of the older Diskeeper releases (~2002 I think) with many of the functions disabled. It's obsolete now: does not even run on Vista, and no longer available AFAIK.

'Pro' is just a variant of the full fledged Diskeeper version. It's a step above the 'home' version and below the enterprise versions. Infact, Diskeeper 2009 Pro is my current defragger on the XP machines, and it's brilliant. But ofcourse, it's not free.
 
i've been using diskeeper for almost everything. But for computers I sell, I use defraggler and sometime JK defrager. Both very good, and most of all, free.
 
Poll closed, start a new thread if anyone thinks this topic is still relevant... Or just go buy an SSD and fughedaboutit.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back