Best defrag software

Diskkeeper

And whats wrong with the disk defragmentor that comes with windows?

Cant do some stuff like defrag registry, pagefile, MFT.

Yes this does make a difference specially increasing the size of the mft and a regular defrag of the PF, and MFT. This will prevent long term file errors and increase access times in the long run. Also windows defrag will cause long term errors because windows defrag cannot move files that the system has in memory or cache.

This looks like an old thread, but since it's been bumped up, I'll throw in another vote for Diskeeper. It always works perfectly on my system(s) and has multiple defrag modes to choose from.

It's not that old really, and did come up on Google when I searched for advice

Well I downloaded the trial. It seems to work reasonably. Performed an intial normal defrag. But then failed when I tried a boot-up defrag (after complaining of not being able to open a log file ?!?)

Doesn't seem able to get rid of all the "red". And has serious problems when the free space is limited, finishing with next to nothing changed.

And comes up with some strange claims at times, such as claiming my C: drive had 0% free space, when it actually has 38%.

But on the plus side, after a number of runs, it has made a big difference in the fragmentation, well above what the MS supplied defrag was able to do. And unlike the MS one, informed me that the page file was in 13 parts (!), which it has now gathered together into one.

It seems a reasonable utility, but with a few unexplained bits as mentioned.

I've been using Auslogics disk defrag for quite a while now and I think it does a pretty good job. It's also free...can't beat that!

PerfectDisk 2008.

Main rival to disk keeper, but does actually work in my experience.

Disk defrag should *not* clear up any space; it should only rearrange file fragments to make them contiguous. Unless it deletes files ofcourse.

Can you check and reply whether whether Auslogics has deleted your restore points in Vista? Are there any restore points from the time before you ran this defrag? The fact that it freed up ~13% of the drive which is about the amount of space reserved for restore points, is a bit unnerving.

With Vista, it's always better to use a VSS-aware defragmenter to preserve shadow copies/restore points. Infact, I use Diskeeper 2008 pro, and the manual expressly recommends the use of the VSS-aware defrag mode on such Vista volumes. Incidentally, I've not had any problems with Diskeeper, and it always does an excellent job in keeping the drives defragmented.

I've used Perfect Disk in the past, which is okay, and better than the built in tools that you get with Windows. I haven't tried the other rival products but I'd say Perfect Disk is pretty good at what it does.

I think the problem is a lot of people have the wrong idea about what Disk Defrag actually does. And so they're a little disappointed when they don't notice a life changing surge or an upturn in performance the second Windows reboots! The normal Windows disk defrag is by no means useless. It's just not very....user friendly.

I use Defraggler and I see major improvements in my system to the point that I run it almost weekly. I do a lot of file moving from disk to disk (aka downloading, editing, etc) and Defraggler has always managed to keep my drives inline unlike anything else. It's not a huge program with fancy bells and whistles but what it does do it does well.

ive never noticed a suitable drop in performance from a fragmented drive to worry about it, however i have noticed a big drop in performance when using programs that defrag in the background(they are sometimes slow to stop), therefore i defrag using the normal windows tool about 1 every 6 month while im at work so it doesn't take up any of my time.

O&O is pretty good too
Its fast can run as a Background app and as a Screensaver too

Use the one provided with Windows.

I tried Diskeeper, and for sure it has finished sooner, but its result is bad - just as nearly all third-party defrags.

To understand it, you must know that putting file fragments together, as third-party softwares do, isn't enough. Windows' Defrag also puts together (since W98) the files that belong to a single application. Compare both with a watch and by listening to the hard drive's arm: Windows' Defrag is better.

About the register: Windows reads it fully to the Ram at bootup, so fragmentation is irrelevant, and writes immediately a full copy of it that will be the new register file.

About the paging file: it is anyway good practice to freeze its size to avoid fragmentation. Reduce it to zero, defragment, and create a fixed-size paging file - it won't move any more.

Windows' Defrag does defragment files currently in use.

More than choosing your defrag software, you can improve things by a sound partition of your hard drive. Put Windows on a (not too) small volume, application on another, and your documents on a third one. Only the Windows volume gets fragmented but doesn't mess up the applications volume, and the Windows volume is quickly defragmented. This small volume, at the beginning of the disk (fastest place) also keeps all pieces of Win close to another, thus reducing arm movements. Next advantage: if formatting the Windows volume, you keep your documents, and some programs stay ready to run.

Use Ntfs - for this reason as well - because Windows' Defrag is much faster on it.

Consolidating free space: Not very important with Ntfs, as it doesn't fragment a file just to use the first available free space. So letting some free space fragmented is a sound time saving.

I defrag about twice a month, it takes me 3 min in such a configuration.

I'd say background defragmentation is a huge way of actually fragmenting the files!
On a clean install every program gets installed in a folder, placed on an empty space on the harddrive.
As soon as you start background defragging, files of one program end up defragmented inbetween other files of other programs.
So instead of having one program located in one directory, located on one location on the disk, now they are spread around the disk.
That's one of the reasons what makes vista so slow.
As far as reading something into ram in vista, that's all great and all, but you still need to read it from the disk, before it can be loaded into the ram.

I'm currently also using O&O defrag, and it seems pretty ok!

The slowest 3 settings are good for the once in 3-6 month defragger.
It also has background defragging, but you can disable that fairly easy!

Diskeeper is definitely the best solution. They have developed a lot of unique technology that allows it to be a fully automatic solution for fragmentation. Of course, you can always tell it not to run at certain times as well, but I have never had to use that feature. It also does well in low free space environments, handle all system critical files, etc.

You should get a copy of the free trial off their website. It is fully fictional and I am sure you will be happy with it.

I have used O&O for the past 4 years and until recently it has been prety good. now I'm finding that it glitches on some files. it will sit there and move one mp3 back and forth for hours unless I stop it. it has also had problems with lots of large files on a drive. i have things like rainbow tables and iso's of dvds that have never been defraged. I moved to diskeeper a few months ago and it has no problem with the large files. the only problem i have with it is that it takes about 20 mins just to analyze my external 500 gig sata drive.

It makes a heck of a difference if you are trying to defrag your partition small enough so that you can have a single dual layer or maybe a single 4.29G DVD hold a live,installable backup of your Vista partition...

Vopt wont defrag the mft, although vopt is great, this makes me wish it had... I used Several different free and trial versions of defragmenters to see which one I liked best. I wont say which of the commercial ones i liked best because that was a while ago and I dont recall which one i used. Suffice to say Several of them allow MFT defragmenting and the included one is the regular crap that windows puts with it's operating system so they can say it has one.

It's like you're using Paint and PhotoShop.. heck of a difference, and there's a lot bewteen the two, some of it free, some of it great.

If you want to reinstall your oem Vista and go through all the crap it installs, and leave on the stupid partition at the end of your drive taking up valuable space, that's fine.

But just imagine making the restore 2 or 3 DVD SET that it <allows> you to do once.. and then restore your Vista to see that it works.. Then you take off all the crap that you DONT want, don't need, and wont ever use and then defrag the heck out of it, and then back it up onto 1 dvd using a live-installable program like Acronis.. You will need to use acronis or some other partition-magic(which isnt vista compatible)-like-substance to make it smaller.

If you rely on windows disk manager to Shrink the drive, it will hit a limit where it cannot go past, even tho there is TONS of empty space on your drive.. so what is the problem? It's windows OWN defrag which cannot move certain files...

I eventually got it to the point where after temporarily setting the Virtual Memory size to Zero for all drives ( I have 12 gig of ram), then rebooting and "Actually" erasing the virtual memory file, I could defrag one last time, shrink it with acronis and then use Acronis to make an emergency Vista reinstall DVD on a single dual layer disk. I have all the drivers and settings that are standard with vista, and the current updates for it and although I may never need it. I have it... no crapola crippled versions of games i never used, and all the bare minimum stuff I NEED on my computer in a small enough package that I can install it on the smallest partition possible.. If you don't enjoy Vista to after it's installed, wading thru screen after screen of junk that it does when it's installing the rest of itself and crapola, you cannot use windows defrag.

Windows buys technology from people and uses it until it rusts and causes problems, then it solves it minimally itself or buys up the first thing that would fix it.

the elder geek on his website used to complain about windows' OPEN TCP/IP stack and that it was not secure like the Unix/BSD stack it was copied from. The unix stack being on a secure platform was either initially secure from the start or was Made secure later when the need arose for closing such a holes. That's why trojans and viruses run rampant on windows systems, not primarily because they are so prevalent on desktops, but because it's so easy for programs to open a connection to the internet without having to ask the operating system for permission. Only when you install service pack after service pack or have a separate Anti-virus/Firewall program do you get something in the way of a Band-Aid to fix it. It's not built in, so it's easy for infections to get in.

Windows 7 installs on a single layer DVD, why cant an oem backup of your vista installation be that small?
The GOOD win7 dvds are AIO(all in one)which lets you pick 32 bits for someone's tiny computer if you need it, but have 64 bits for the monsters..

Note, the defrag on Win 7, is still not as good as most commercial products... we're stuck with the same old song and dance, my friends...

I recommend defraggler which is made by piriform (the same bunch that brought us Ccleaner)

You may find it here. It is completely free :

http://www.piriform.com/defraggler


I hope that helps you.