Jump to content

So how would you rate this defrag?


slowday444

Recommended Posts

  • Moderators

Hi slowday, I like trying new stuff, but not too sure about new defrag applications. Doing this sort of operation under Returnil or Powershadow is definitely not a good idea.

 

I was hoping someone with test pcs might have given this a whirl, (selfish I know guys, but I've only one pc and one drive), but I've downloaded it anyway, as it has the Geek Tested green tick. Hope that's as good a recommendation as I hope it is.

 

Have you tried it? :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi slowday, I like trying new stuff, but not too sure about new defrag applications. Doing this sort of operation under Returnil or Powershadow is definitely not a good idea.

 

I was hoping someone with test pcs might have given this a whirl, (selfish I know guys, but I've only one pc and one drive), but I've downloaded it anyway, as it has the Geek Tested green tick. Hope that's as good a recommendation as I hope it is.

 

Have you tried it? :)

I liked the look of the gui, that is why I posted the question. I haven't tried it, however, if any positive feedback comes in I will.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators
At only 94.9 KB for the download I'd think it was just using the built in Microsoft/Executive Software Defrag API, which begs to differ why bother with it.

Now I wouldn't have realized that, and no disrespect to JKDefrag, but I use windows defrag mostly now anyways, and if thats the case, and as it's already installed, I might just keep this for the GUI, which I quite like.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Perfect disk 7 showed 283 fragments before an Ultra defrag and 79 after an Ultra defrag but the placements looked much the same.XP VM.

 

Before Ultra Defrag

 

 

After Ultra

 

 

After PD Smart Placement

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators

Just tried Ultradefrag on my C: drive. Same sort of result.

 

Before Defrag.

DefragBefore.jpg.xs.jpg

 

After Defrag.

DefragAfter.jpg.xs.jpg

 

Not a lot of difference visually, although the numbers said 780 fragmented down to 151.

 

What is evident, is how lightning fast windows explorer opens folders, and how much more quickly applications load.

 

Exactly the same improvement I get after using windows defrag tool, but not the same visual result.

 

Don't you just love computers. :rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just tried Ultradefrag on my C: drive. Same sort of result.

 

Before Defrag.

DefragBefore.jpg.xs.jpg

 

After Defrag.

DefragAfter.jpg.xs.jpg

 

Not a lot of difference visually, although the numbers said 780 fragmented down to 151.

 

What is evident, is how lightning fast windows explorer opens folders, and how much more quickly applications load.

 

Exactly the same improvement I get after using windows defrag tool, but not the same visual result.

 

Don't you just love computers. :rolleyes:

 

Try that before and after comparison but use JK Defrag. The difference is very large.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators

I don't think I'll defrag again straightaway Anthony, but I don't doubt you at all. I've seen the difference JKDefrag makes visually.

 

But I don't get the same performance after using JKD, which is why I went back to using Windows defrag tool.

 

I don't know enough to explain why one looks better, but the other one works better for me, but I think I'll stick with whichever one makes my HD run smoother and quieter, and at the moment that's Windows, or Ultra, which apparently could be the same beast with a different GUI.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think I'll defrag again straightaway Anthony, but I don't doubt you at all. I've seen the difference JKDefrag makes visually.

 

But I don't get the same performance after using JKD, which is why I went back to using Windows defrag tool.

 

I don't know enough to explain why one looks better, but the other one works better for me, but I think I'll stick with whichever one makes my HD run smoother and quieter, and at the moment that's Windows, or Ultra, which apparently could be the same beast with a different GUI.

 

I don't notice a performance difference with any defrag program. That's probably because I don't let the disk get too messed up before I defrag again. Usually once a month I defrag. I do see a big difference though in how the disk looks after I use JK Defrag and than analyze it with the Windows built in defrag.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators

The only free defrag tool I've ever noticed a "visual difference" after using is the one included with Avira NTFS4DOS Personal the freeware version which must be used via a floppy bootdisk. It's a DOS based defrag utility, and it's beyond stupidly slow even the Win9x defrag tool is light years faster than it (start it before going to bed in other words). However it does work!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.