Best Defrag utility?

[SP1]

Smart Defrag @ iobit.com

[Omastar]

The 'best'? They all do the same thing. You may hear of for-pay defrag software writers using proprietary algorithms, thus making the defragmented drive faster, but it's a pantsload. Maximum PC did a test a while back, comparing all the defraggers and the results in various applications after defragging were within the 'statistical anomaly' region (think 1 or 2%). I personally use JkDefrag (http://www.kessels.com/Jkdefrag/) because it's lightweight, free, command line and no fruity GUI and big, stupid Vista-esque buttons.

[BababooeyHTJ]

Either Diskeeper or Perfectdisk, depending on "how" you like to keep your HDD defragmented. You can find information on the differences between Perfectdisk and Diskeeper here. It's a very interesting read with information provided by actual representatives from Raxco (PerfectDisk) and Diskeeper Corp on how their product works.

Thanks for the link. Great read, I dont know if its worth it for me as a home user to pay $40 or $50 for defrag software. I cant use windows de:banana::banana::banana:ger it's incredibly slow. The one thing that I dont like about diskeeper is the fact that thats another process running in the background that I dont need. I do like the sound of perfectdisk, but I dont know if it's worth the $40 premium over jkdefrag. The one thing that PD can do that jk cant is defrag the mft, I dont know if thats really even that important.

[Baleful]

Maximum PC did a defrag shootout a while ago on Vista and Vista's built in defragger came in first. I've used a few 3rd party apps, but Vista's built in has never failed me.

[chouchou]

I've alwayts used auslogic's free version. Simple google search will get you it. Works well for me!

[BababooeyHTJ]

After using Jkdefrag I noticed my pc booted up a little slower. I am now using perfectdisk and so far I like it. Its fast, dosent run anything in the background when not in use, and does a good job. My pc is booting up faster now, than after using Jkdefrag. I also like auslogics. It does do a quick and effecient job, but it dosent manage free space or defrag the mft or page file. Vista built in takes forever. Thats my problem with it. Ive left it on overnight and it dosent finish.

[slim142]

+1 for Diskeeper
Havent tried anything else so far, but DK is been great!

[John Planet]

PerfectDisk 2008. Auto defrag (it has a few flavors of this mode) keeps my disks at .01 fragmentation transparently.

[Gilhooley]

Best I've used is Ultimatedefrag (http://www.disktrix.com/UDIntroduction.htm) but its slow and I use smaller partitions for my "fragmenting" files. So atm I use Perfectdisk. But the option to move "slow" files to the end of the disk - can be quite usefull.

[Xoulz]

O&O

laterzzz..............

That ^^ bar none!

link: O&O defrag!

[XSAlliN]

I don't know if there is a best anymore (there used to be but things changed) but this is what I tried and does what it's suppose to do:

Auslogics Disk Defrag

Defraggler

UltimateDefrag

JkDefrag

IObit SmartDefrag

Chose one that suits your needs, they're all excellent products and free.

[Roger_D25]

Since I changed to Vista 64-bit from Windows XP Pro I have tried a few different defrag programs. Before making the switch I used Diskeeper exclusivly but their "Boot-Time Defrag" did not work with Vista SP-1 so that is when I started trying different programs. I tried O & O, Perfect Disk, JKDefrag, and Ultimate Defrag but after giving them all a decent try I decided to stick with Perfect Disk because it was easy and intuitive to use. I'm not a pro when it comes to programs like these so ease of use and the GUI are important to me. With that all said however Diskeeper just released their 2009 version which re-incorperates "Boot-Time Defrag" so I just installed it last night. Out of all these programs I'm most confortable with Diskeeper (and I use their Diskeeper Pro version). It is very easy to use, the GUI is very intuitive, and the defrag engine seems to be comprehensive and fast. Granted it may not organize the data on your HDD in a way like JKDefrag or Ultimate Defrag has the ability to do but for someone like myself (ordinary computer user) it works great. Plus its one of the first defrag programs that offers special defrag options for SSD drives.

The only drawback of all these programs (and this probably has more to do with Vista than it does with the programs themselves) is that despite my best efforts I can't elimiate all the fragmented files like I could in Windows XP Pro (it never goes below 500 fragments and there is always left over "Low Performing" files left behind). I have done multiple "Boot-Time Defrags" with all of these programs and have also disabled VSC (Volume Shadow Copy) but neither helped to completly defrag the drive? Well guys this is a great thread and was very helpful for me.

[FatRakoon]

Another vote for O&O

v10 kind of lost the plot but v11 has rekindled my love for it although my personal favourite is v8.6 as this runs faster than any others plus its Vista and XP friendly in both 32 and 64 bit flavours!

[Indignity]

JKDefrag user here as well. I only use it when I go through & uninstall apps that I haven't used in a while or when I've done a fresh install of Windows. Noted about the slow boot.... I've found multiple runs of it over a couple of evenings does the trick for me.

I'm in the habit of putting my data on a separate drive & don't usually clean that up nearly as much as my OS partition.

[Ensamvarg]

I vote for Auslogics Disk Defrag, once I found it I was a happy chappy and still am =]

[Soulburner]

Granted it may not organize the data on your HDD in a way like JKDefrag or Ultimate Defrag has the ability to do but for someone like myself (ordinary computer user) it works great.

DK does do intelligent sequencing of data (IFAAST).

Plus its one of the first defrag programs that offers special defrag options for SSD drives.

Why would you defrag an SSD drive? It's my understanding that would only severely shorten its useable lifespan if you defragmented on a regular basis.

You can't improve on 1ms response. Unless there is something I'm missing.