Jump to content

Defraggler vs Disk Defragmenter in System Tools


wdrbbq

Recommended Posts

I don't know who to believe. After running Defraggler the report says that 21% of my files are fragmented. After running Disk Defragmenter, which comes with the computer under 'System Tools', the report says 0%. Who do I believe when the results are so different?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators

Yep. They'll use different algorithms for determing the level of fragmentation. And my poor old memory is telling me that the Vista onwards defragger doesn't class file extents of 64mb as fragments, or stops combining when an extent reaches 64 mb, so you will see fewer fragments. Mind you 64 mb is a huge file to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Defraggler counts more files than MS Defragger, such as Sys Vol Info, which are not defraggable.

 

Read here post 2.

Ok, but I have further info. After running Defraggler five consecutive times and only getting the fragmented files down to 21%, I ran the Disk Defragmenter from 'System Tools' and got 0% as I stated originally. Then, after posting my original question I ran Defraggler again and this time got 0% fragmented files with zero fragments as well. In reference to your response, I accept that Defraggler considers more files than the Disk Defragmenter but why would Defraggler also give me 0% fragmentation after running Disk Defragmenter when before it was 21%? Wouldn't those "not defraggable" files remain untouched if they are not counted by Disk Defragmenter? Doesn't this suggest that Disk Defragmenter may be better than Defraggler at defragmenting files? After all, running Defraggler five times still gave me 21% fragmentation while after running the Disk Defragmenter from 'System Tools' once, the fragmentation went down to zero, and this is according to Defraggler, itself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your investigation is interesting. smiley-char145.gif I commend you for trying the multiple runs to determine your results.

 

When I run defraggler I don't defrag the entire partition. In File list or View files I click path to sort the files, highlight a group and defrag; or ☑Filename and defrag the entire list. This method is very fast and takes only seconds. But I am always left with a frag count higher than zero, which I accept.

 

I don't know why multiple runs would lower the count. Like you, I would like to read an explanation from a techie.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your investigation is interesting. smiley-char145.gif I commend you on trying the multiple runs to determine your results.

 

When I run defraggler I don't defrag the entire partition. In File list or View files I click path to sort the files, highlight a group and defrag; or ☑Filename and defrag the entire list. This method is very fast and takes only seconds. But I am always left with a frag count higher than zero, which I accept.

 

I don't know why multiple runs would lower the count. Like you, I would like to read an explanation from a techie. confused-smiley-001.gif

I'm not sure why you would exclude files. Is it strictly to save time? I have always run the entire file list. In my experience I have found that if I run Defraggler twice in a row, at least the number of fragments if not the percentage will decrease slightly. After the second run however, I tend to get diminishing returns ultimately to the point where there is no decrease at all. That's why I ran Defraggler five times in a row, to assure the numbers would not go lower. Incidentally, I have noticed that when I have Google Earth installed my number of undefragmentable files skyrockets and when I dump it the number gradually lowers to a reasonable level if not zero. I've installed and uninstalled Google Earth on two occasions and this is what I have observed. I've only done it twice so it's not exactly scientific evidence. However, my fragmentation went from zero to over twenty percent two days after installing it on both occasions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not sure why you would exclude files. Is it strictly to save time?

Efficiency (quick results and only for necessary improvements). I believe defragging the entire partition is unnecessary and a waste of pc time, just for the display to appear tidier. Very soon after defragging your disk begins to frag, so what have you accomplished by momentarily having near-zero frag?

 

Defrag is not a priority with me for I rarely notice any improvement in performance. I seldom defrag except after uninstalling large files. But I did defrag my chess game recently because it was starting slower, and I noticed an improvement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Efficiency (quick results and only for necessary improvements). I believe defragging the entire partition is unnecessary and a waste of pc time, just for the display to appear tidier. Very soon after defragging your disk begins to frag, so what have you accomplished by momentarily having near-zero frag?

 

Defrag is not a priority with me for I rarely notice any improvement in performance. I seldom defrag except after uninstalling large files. But I did defrag my chess game recently because it was starting slower, and I noticed an improvement.

Yes, I tend to agree with you. I don't notice a difference in performance between 0% and 21%. We do these things because people tell us we should. It's difficult to separate fact from opinion. I suppose if the percentage got high enough we would notice but until then it's only a matter of statistics. Thanks for your input.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 years later...

There has never been anything in human existence which surpasses defragmentation as a satisfactory way to pass the day - except perhaps PacMan.

 

Defraggler has become a clinically accepted supplement to detox protocols in crack cocaine, meth, alcohol, and Windows XP withdrawal programs all over the Western hemisphere. Defraggler thumb drives are now being stocked in homeopathic drug stores in Germany and Poland. Purloined CDs with Defraggler are turning up in those wooden drawers you find in Chinese herbal medicine stores.

 

It's even better than changing the diaper on one's first daughter.

 

However, just like the daughter's dirty diaper - it probably does not make that much difference to her if you don't bother at every little poop.

 

But if you don't do the big ones - then you have a real problem.

 

But whether to defrag spasmodically (every day) like I do - or once every few months - it sure is fun! Makes you feel real good - squeaky clean - by proxy. Can you imagine being taken to the emergency room with dirty underwear? Well - how about if the emergency PC clinic saw your dirty un-defragged hard drive. Ugh!

 

Piriform should give us little static-cling stickers for the monitor telling us when the next Defraggler is due.

 

At the end of the day. if you want a fast hard drive:


  • Don't let the hard drive get over (maybe) 70% full.

  • Every couple of years, restore the hard drive from a backup, putting those huge *.iso, *.zip,and *.vol files on first so as to keep them upfront.

  • Whenever it pleases you, after a long day, run Piriform Defraggler and stare at the screen.

 

I love Defraggler, and I adore Piriform. I am going to ask Piriform to marry me; and Defraggler is going to be the best man. CCleaner is the flower girl. And Speecy is the ring bearer.

 

But the question was: should we run Defraggler twice? Well . . . . It ain't going to make no difference. Once in a while, and run just once, will squeeze 99.9% of the juice from that lemon. But - when you finish that Gin & Tonic, it's still really nice to suck on the lime one last time. Isn't it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators

Well, the last time the OP signed on was over three years ago, so this long ramble probably isn't going to be much help, especially as the question wasn't 'Should we run Defraggler twice?'.

 

Digging up ancient threads rarely helps anyone. If you really want to add to the sum of human knowledge then please start a new topic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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