PC Pals Forum
Technical Help & Discussion => General Tech Discussion, News & Q&A => Topic started by: Mac on April 01, 2006, 12:33
-
15 MINUTE DEFRAGMENTATION and DRIVE PERFORMANCE FLASH DEMO (http://www.diskeepereurope.com/assets/flash/fulltour_uk_swf/diskeeper_tour.htm)
DEFRAGMENTATION and DRIVE PERFORMANCE EUROPEAN SITE (http://www.diskeepereurope.com)
Very interesting demonstration, especially on the question of maintaining the master file tables at the right size to prevent fragmentation from occuring.
The only software program which I twist people's arms to use!
I find that the Frag-Shield part of it needs to be done first followed by a boot time defrag with chkdsk and defragmenting of the Master File Tables (MFTs) and paging file(s) and then it should be looked at again.
If the MFT's are alright then the result should be better. Then you can set the 'Set it and forget it' with free-space consolidation and the CPU priority set on high.
(https://www.pc-pals.com/smf/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi14.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fa327%2FXPOS%2FDK10-PRO-03.jpg&hash=004ad30a2b5e0f3b7b9b5a74bf63cf290cdc49e6)
(https://www.pc-pals.com/smf/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi14.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fa327%2FXPOS%2FFragShield01.jpg&hash=dacfae451420696d1da6d1cd96c1f4a37ede9248)
The novice user should take the time to go through the different sections and see how everything works.
-
Ran the demo, Mac. Great for business users I would think but not for the likes of me.
I use Norton utilities. Switch it on while out doing the shopping and it's finished when I get home. :)
-
Much faster than Norton and runs in the background so you never have to switch it on.
Norton Utilities won't pad the master file tables on NTFS volumes, as far as I am aware. (?)
I have watched Norton struggle for hours on end whilst this takes seconds.
MS should offer it as freeware on their download site.
-
I have tried Diskeeper twice now, and can't get along with it. It keeps popping up when I don't expect it to, and makes me wonder if it could possibly shorten the life of a hard drive, with all the constant defragging and rearranging. Maybe I've got it wrong, or I have misunderstood how it works, but it's not one I would personally recommend.
-
It's just the full version of the default XP defrag. It definitely won't do any disk damage, exactly the opposite.
Not defragmenting is likely to shorten the life of the drive, as the heads have to work overtime. The electronics and pivots have to do a lot more work picking up data on a fragmented drive.
-
Just ran the latest version of Diskeeper 10 now sold as 'Home and Professional' with a choice to install either Home or Professional on the install screen. (Daft, as the Professional version works on both XP Home and XP Professional.)
I got an immediate improvement in read time of exactly 40% which is like adding...
400MHz to a 1000Mhz processor
800MHz to a 2000Mhz processor
1200MHz to a 3000Mhz processor
Some rise in performance with an effective increase from 3.0GHz to 4.2GHz, and a lot safer than overclocking.
--------------
Mac has requested an update to this post, but the original post has been left unedited, to avoid confusion further down the thread - Simon (Admin)
After running Diskeeper 10 Professional for the first time an immediate improvement in read time of exactly 40% was achieved which is equivalent to restoring your...
1000MHz processor from 600MHz back to full 1000MHz efficiency
2000MHz processor from 1200MHz back to full 2000MHz efficiency
3000MHz processor from 1800MHz back to full 3000MHz efficiency
A remarkable restoration of read - write times.
It also shows why some systems are crawling when the entire drive is badly fragmented.
(Note: The Professional version works on both XP Home and XP Professional and is the better choice.)
-
After getting the 40% increase I mentioned earlier this is the latest result...
Job Report
Volume Local Drive C:
Recommendations
---------------------
Findings on C:
Diskeeper has completed a defragmentation run on this volume and there remain 0 fragmented files and/or directories and 0 excess fragments.
(There were 0 excess fragments before the defragmentation run, and now there are 0% fewer.)
The average number of fragments per file is 1.00.
Congratulations! There are no excess file or directory fragments on this volume. The files on this volume are as defragmented as possible. Still, you should use the Smart Scheduling option in Diskeeper to automatically keep fragmentation at a low level. Click 'Set It and Forget It' in the Quick Launch pane to specify a Smart Schedule.
Volume Health
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
The overall health of volume C: is not currently affected by fragmentation due to the low level of fragmentation.
There are no volume health issues related to fragmentation.
Access Time
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Time to read fragmented files on volume C:
Current read time: 1095 milliseconds
Optimum read time: 1095 milliseconds
0% improvement
Time to read all files on volume C: [EDIT: 6,853,967,872,Bytes (6.38 GB)]
Current read time: 4 minutes
Optimum read time: 4 minutes
0% improvement
Statistics
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Volume Files
Volume size = 10,236 MB
Cluster size = 4 KB
Used space = 6,369 MB
Free space = 3,867 MB
Percent free space = 37 %
Defragmentation method = Free Space Consolidation
Fragmentation percentage
Volume fragmentation = 0 %
Data fragmentation = 0 %
Directory fragmentation
Total directories = 3,058
Fragmented directories = 0
Excess directory fragments = 0
File fragmentation
Total files = 31,201
Average file size = 213 KB
Total fragmented files = 0
Total excess fragments = 0
Average fragments per file = 1.00
Files with performance loss = 0
Paging file fragmentation
Paging/Swap file size = 236 MB
Total fragments = 1
Master File Table (MFT) fragmentation
Total MFT size = 70,160 KB
MFT records In Use = 34,315
Percent MFT in use = 48 %
Total MFT fragments = 0
During additional free space consolidation, 1824 files were moved.
The number of free spaces decreased from 126 to 33.
Most Fragmented Files
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fragments File size Most fragmented files
None
(https://www.pc-pals.com/smf/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi14.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fa327%2FXPOS%2FDK10-PRO-01.jpg&hash=e96456b00a527a8b200a0c3d7995abd136469005)
(https://www.pc-pals.com/smf/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi14.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fa327%2FXPOS%2FDK10-PRO-02.jpg&hash=c9d0621d30bb9a26ec02bdfc23b72faec8552b21)
Pity I didn't capture the one showing the 40% performance increase.
This one shows that there has been a 15% degradation in performance since the 40% increase, followed by a restoration providing a 15% return to peak performance.
All achieved automatically without user intervention except for the taking of the screen shots when I heard that Diskeeper was running.
-
I got an immediate improvement in read time of exactly 40% which is like adding...
400MHz to a 1000Mhz processor
800MHz to a 2000Mhz processor
1200MHz to a 3000Mhz processor
Some rise in performance with an effective increase from 3.0GHz to 4.2GHz, and a lot safer than overclocking.
well not really, it is just hard disk speed time... you can't really claim this... maybe I am just being a pedant about terminology. Still though, you do get much better hard disk read times if you take care of your computer and you will notice it... either that or format your hard disk and remove windows! :-)
-
If the hard drive is the slowest part of the system, which it is, then a 40% increase has to make a difference.
Imagine increasing a 7,200 rev/min drive to 10,080 rev/min
Or increasing a 10,000 rev/min drive to 14,000 rev/min
So what sort of speed increase would one get if using a 10,000 rev/min drive ... and Diskeeper?
From 7,200 to 14,000 is nearly double.
-
yes but not in processing speed / in read in / read out, which is why I was commenting that what you said is misleading. Still though, your overall system performance would be better.
-
I was using an equivalence as an example.
So the next item is to increase the drive speed, as it is the slowest part of the system. Going from 7,200 rev/min to 10,000 rev/min is about a 39% increase. Add the 40% increase in read time and processing speed is bound to increase as it doesn't take so long to find the data.
Overall it is like a car engine being in a good state of tune rather than a poor one.
E.G.
Contiguous file system...
DATA-DATA-DATA
Fragmented file system...
DATA-------time-------DATA-------time-------DATA
Simply, distance over time.
Try this one...
contiguous
f r a g m e n t e d
It actually takes longer for your 'computer' (the brain) to read with the spaces, as your eye has to move from one letter to the next.
-
yes, obviously. Nice example to use for anyone with little or no experience with hard drives. Systems shouldn't get too fragmented, really. But they do, well if you use better filesystem then this is less of an issue... but then again you can't use windows.
-
You prefer Linux Sam?
I find that Windows runs perfectly with Diskeeper's automatic defragmentation, but not without it. All too often I have found undersized master file tables to be at the root of the problem and using Diskeeper's frag-shield has made an immediate improvement.
(They would do better to call it MFT-CHECK in my opinion, and change the marketing from 'Set it and Forget it' to, simply, 'Automatic'.)
Of course if you don't have access to frag-shield then the user will never discover the problem and it will never be corrected. (Ignorance is bliss.)
MS should simply include the full Diskeeper package instead of just their basic offering as you get far less fragmentation and practically no file problems.
Once it has been set up properly and the MFTs checked a couple of times you can just leave it to run automatically in the background. It now only takes about 10 seconds to fully defragment the 10GB C: drive on this machine, much to my surprise.
What do you use to defragment the Linux file system?
-
I have taken your advice, Mac, and re-installed DK, but so far I have run it 8 times, and still my drive is fragmented, and requires further optimisation. It has got better each time, and I am sure it will eventually do the job, but I could probably have used Norton's Speed Disk, left the PC overnight, and it would have been done in one go. I think DK will be useful once the initial defrag is done, but it's a bit of a pain to have to keep manually restarting the defragment process, for it to do a bit at a time.
That said, I think I know what your answer is going to be. I could have 'Set It and Forget It', on High Priority, and it would have done it overnight, right? Not too obvious for the novice user though, would you agree?
-
I find that the mft check needs to be done first followed by a boot time defrag and then it should be looked at again, then you can set the 'Set it and forget it' with free-space consolidation and the CPU priority set on high, as you say.
The novice user should really take the time to go through the different sections and see how everything works.
-
Did you find that the mft's needed to be enlarged Simon?
They have on 9 out of ten computers I've looked at, much to my surprise.
-
Well, DK said it did, Mac, but it seemed to be managing perfectly well before, and doesn't appear to have made much of a difference. In fact, I believe this is something Windows XP tends to sort out for itself, when it needs to. It seemed a little bit of a coincidence that my MFT just happened to be at 98% when I started using DK, after 3 years of using the PC without even knowing about it. Forgive my scepticism, I'm not saying DK is a bad program by any means, but a lot of these 'bells & whistles' type utilities do tend to use scare tactics in order to make people think they are worthwhile. As you said yourself, DK is basically Windows Defragger. I just see it as Windows Defragger, in a multi-coloured jacket.
:)
-
Well, DK said it did, Mac, but it seemed to be managing perfectly well before, and doesn't appear to have made much of a difference.
In fact, I believe this is something Windows XP tends to sort out for itself, when it needs to. It seemed a little bit of a coincidence that my MFT just happened to be at 98% when I started using DK, after 3 years of using the PC without even knowing about it.
Forgive my scepticism, I'm not saying DK is a bad program by any means, but a lot of these 'bells & whistles' type utilities do tend to use scare tactics in order to make people think they are worthwhile. As you said yourself, DK is basically Windows Defragger.
I just see it as Windows Defragger, in a multi-coloured jacket.
Your comments are interesting as they are really saying that the entire system is being marketed in the wrong way.
DK 10 Pro with frag-shield should therefore be an integral part of Windows XP, in order to avoid the 'scare tactics' theory, and would probably represent more of an advance than the introduction of Windows Vista for XP users.
I have had a case of the MFT standing at 98% and the drive was quite badly fragmented and showing signs of data corruption. Enlarging the MFT did make a worthwhile difference.
As for Windows XP sorting things out for itself, I have set the System Restore to make restore points every hour and to keep the restore points for one week, but it doesn't seem to want to conform to this and is rather hit and miss. Even the hourly periods between restore points are never exactly one hour...
When you mention 'bells & whistles' I think of a program called TuneUp Utilities which I think would sell very well indeed and also become an integral part of XP if it could be stripped down to just registry cleaner and optimiser.
I tend to steer clear of Norton's recent products as they tend to use a lot in the way of system resources although that depends on the overall hardware capabilty.
Really you would need to ask an industrial user for their private opinion of DK rather than accept the advertising copy writer's marketing strategy.
You'll notice that neuro-surgeons do not advertise in the same way, if at all.
I would guess that you have now increased the size of the MFT according to the frag-shield recommendation.
You should be able to see a difference in the performance of the defragmenter itself and the file performance should get better and better until it reaches an optimum level.
-
Yes, I have increased the MFT, according to the advice from DK, so we shall see how it goes. Interestingly, and this is what made me sceptical, when I first received the MFT warning from DK, I Googled the text, and it came up with hundreds of different DK users on different forums, all asking the same question - what does it mean? This inclined me to wonder if the coincidence of everyone's MFT being shown at 98%, once scanned by DK 10 Pro (which is the one I am using, incidentally), could be slightly dubious. Many of the answers given were to ignore it, as Windows would sort it out, and one or two even said it was quite dangerous, as things could go pear shaped if you didn't leave DK in Set and Forget mode, although I didn't see any mention of problems if DK were to be uninstalled.
On the subject of Norton, I was an avid fan, until I read reports that the latest version was a terrible resources hogger (even compared to earlier versions), so as mine was due for renewal, I thought it was an apt opportunity to try out some alternatives. After a few hit and miss trials, one of which (I believe) left so much crap behind, it screwed up my machine, I settled on Bit Defender, which is an AV / Firewall / Anti-Spyware and Anti-Spam Suite all in one, and so far I have not regretted my choice.
Also, talking of bloatware, I installed the latest version of Nero the other week, and couldn't believe the amount of needless 'bells and whistles' it bundled in. I stripped it down as far as possible, then this afternoon, I discovered that both of my CD/DVD Rom drives had mysteriously vanished from My Computer, and had the dreaded :!: beside both of them in device manager. After a lot of head scratching, uninstalling, reinstalling, updating drivers, etc, all to no avail, I thought I would try uninstalling the last thing I messed about with, which was Nero, and hey presto, my devices appeared again, and worked perfectly. I have now reinstalled just the burning rom part of Nero 7, which works fine without all the fancy decorations.
-
Well, I tend to rely on DK 10 when I come across machines that haven't been defragmented in over a year where 50% of the filing system consists of junk files that have never been cleaned out ever since it took '98s defrag 24 hrs to defrag a 10 GB drive. They had 'uninstalled' Outlook Express' in favour of IncrediMail and hadn't removed the 30,000 odd emails. Games, installed in several directories where Mum couldn't find them, had been 'uninstalled' by deleting the shortcut, etc. (Kids).
The latest NERO is a bit gaudy. I like the StartSmart feature though. It is something which needs updating quite a lot, and I would much prefer to see a burning program incorporated into Windows so that the entire operating system can be updated via automatic updates instead of having to remember each seperate item.
I rely on drive imaging to undo any mistakes I make, as I find that you can't rely on System Restore.
I find that a lot of people don't know that you have to click on the NERO logo on the StartSmart panel to get to the updates panel. Clever disguise really... ¿
Since I bought a Lightscribe DVD burner (gimmick) I have this OEM version of NERO which I keep thinking I must remove and put the full, pre-lightscribe, version back on the system to stop the constant 'buy the full version' reminders.
I gave up on Norton years ago, even uninstalling Norton Utilities from an old ME system and giving it away, as it was a resources hog and made too many mistakes.
-
I don't think I've allowed enough of Nero 7 to be installed to bother with the SmartStart thing, although I did find it useful with Nero 6x. As Nero 7 doesn't have the Media Player, I had to search for some plugins for Winamp to play .flac and .shn files. I uninstalled Nero Home, as it just seemed too much of a system hog, but I'm now finding that Nero Scout still continues to fire up every time I start my PC, even though it's been uninstalled. :roll:
-
When your talking about fragments on the hard disk you have to remember your dealing with the organization of data on your disk. Defragmenting does not speed your computer up. It makes your computer more efficient in the way it stores its data on the hard disk. By defragmenting you might be able to load old programs a tad bit faster, but the odds of you noticing a difference in performance on a new machine are slim to none.
If you want to speed your computer up. Follow the advice of someone who ran a computer shop for two years.
1. Go to your local department store and buy a can of compressed air. Open your case once a month and clean out your heat sink.
2. Download a good antivirus program. I personally use nod32 and avg. (set to run once a day when your not using the computer)
3. Download spybot, adaware, and the microsoft anispyware. (run once a week)
4. Download ccleaner and use it ever so often.
5. If your serious about security and keeping your computer clean use firefox, and set it to delete the cookies and temp files everytime you close your window. (this is what i do, its called the lazy way)
The odds of your machine being clogged up with malware and stuffed full of temp files and registery problems are a far higher threat to your computer's speed than a fragmentation problem.
Note: This is just me kicking in my two cents. I think most of you good folks probably already know this. This post is probably aimed mostly at newcomers.
-
Always good to have other perspectives, Bob. :)
-
When your talking about fragments on the hard disk you have to remember your dealing with the organization of data on your disk. Defragmenting does not speed your computer up. It makes your computer more efficient in the way it stores its data on the hard disk. By defragmenting you might be able to load old programs a tad bit faster, but the odds of you noticing a difference in performance on a new machine are slim to none.
The odds of your machine being clogged up with malware and stuffed full of temp files and registry problems are a far higher threat to your computer's speed than a fragmentation problem.
Well, the speed is the speed in terms of hardware benchmarks, on a machine which has only just been entered into service, but you hit the nail on the head there when it comes to efficiency.
A 3.0GHz processor working at 40% reduced efficiency because the files on the hard drive take 40% longer to read due to fragmentation is not processing data as fast as it could if the files are 100% in order, so that the processor can run at 100% efficiency.
It is never advisable to have old temp files, virii or trojans on the system but people should know that by now.
It's a matter of fine tuning and gains in efficiency are cumulative just as losses in efficiency are cumulative.
When you add every possible gain together you increase both efficiency and operability.
Losses in efficiency are the engineers greatest headache and they are always due to bad maintenance.
Good maintenance = good efficiency.
-
I guarantee you that you won't have a 40% increase in the speed of your machine with a defrag. Even after several years of use your computer will NOT gain that much speed from a defrag. If there is an increase in speed it will only be measurable using performance programs. You will not feel a difference, on the off chance you do it will be barely noticeable.
If you do experience an increase in speed it will be likely due to the cleaning out of malware and old registry keys.
-
If - all - the files were fragmented then an overall 40% increase in read time over - all - files would produce a 40% increase, but you can see that there is a separate measure for the read time on all files. You won't see too much change in this except during the initial use of Diskeeper 10 Pro, thereafter, as Diskeeper 10 Pro maintains the files in an unfragmented state, you will just see that the - overall - read time remains the same.
If it takes an application 10 seconds to open before Diskeeper and only 1 second to open after using Diskeeper, that represents a tenfold increase in speed or operability even if the rated hardware speeds stay the same, which they do.
Take a good look at the flash demo.
Similarly there are increases to be had when it comes to startup and shutdown.
My start up time (from pressing the start button to the instant when the desktop wallpaper appears) on a 10GB boot volume, is 67 seconds and shutdown is 10 seconds.
So, after cleaning all the junk files off the drive...
Day one...
1. Check the Master File Tables to see if they require enlarging and follow the recommendations given.
2. Run a boot-time defrag on all volumes setting directories at the front of the drive(s) and checking to run CheckDisk (chkdsk) and defragment the master file table(s) and paging file(s).
3. Set the program on 'Set It And Forget It' with the CPU priority turned up to High and elect to have Diskeeper do a comprehensive defragmentation with free-space consolidation and also elect to 'Efficiently defragment large files in 'Defragmentation Methods' in the 'Set It And Forget It', Primary and Secondary Defragmentation Job Properties.
Day two...
Run through the above procedures again to confirm that all is as it should be, and if it is 'forget' about it for a month or two, or until such time as you perceive there to be a slowdown.
It should now continue to defragment your entire drive automatically.
One less chore to do.
Cleaning out old registry keys and removing malware are separate maintenance items which should be carried out regularly.
Like most others I use SpyBot SD, AdAware SE, SpywareBlaster, CCLeaner and EmpTemp to remove Trojans, junk files and old registry keys and I also pick through the registry by hand every so often.
ERUNT/NTREGOPT is used to make registry backups and to compress the registry hives for a faster startup and the User Profile Hive Cleanup Service, from Microsoft, is used to ensure a clean shutdown.
NONE of the drive volumes use compression, as that slows processing down, and the Compress Old Files registry key has been completely removed for the same reason.
Result of todays automatic defragmentation showing a 43% increase in read time on fragmented files...
(https://www.pc-pals.com/smf/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi14.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fa327%2FXPOS%2FDK10-PRO-04.jpg&hash=888698f4de789f8331628c243e1a9890c43ad161)
Most of the other files on the drive (94%) have remained at zero fragmentation over the 24 hr period.
Have fun!
-
Yes, I have increased the MFT, according to the advice from DK, so we shall see how it goes. Interestingly, and this is what made me sceptical, when I first received the MFT warning from DK, I Googled the text, and it came up with hundreds of different DK users on different forums, all asking the same question - what does it mean? This inclined me to wonder if the coincidence of everyone's MFT being shown at 98%, once scanned by DK 10 Pro (which is the one I am using, incidentally), could be slightly dubious. Many of the answers given were to ignore it, as Windows would sort it out, and one or two even said it was quite dangerous, as things could go pear shaped if you didn't leave DK in Set and Forget mode, although I didn't see any mention of problems if DK were to be uninstalled.
Just to go back to this point which you raised, and as I don't work for Diskeeper and cannot therefore look at any studies they may have done, 98% does seem to be a little coincidental.
Windows is supposed to set aside 12.5% for the MFT on each volume and then increase it when necessary. Note that Windows never decreases the size of the MFT they tell me.
Which exact text did you Google for as I would like to see if there is any correlation between the 98% and the drive size in use.
-
I can't remember the exact wording now, Mac, I think I just copied some of the text from the warning given by DK in the Job Report.
-
I can't remember the exact wording now, Mac, I think I just copied some of the text from the warning given by DK in the Job Report.
Try this:- "Diskeeper reports MFT at 98%"
-
Couldn't find much on the 98% issue but there is this...
Hive: HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE
Key: SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Conrol\FileSystem
Name: NtfsMftZoneReservation
Type: REG_DWORD
Value: 1 12.5% of free space, default
Value: 2 25% of free space
Value: 3 37.5% of free space
Value: 4 50% of free space
There is a new generation of defragmenters that can work with the MFT and paging files.
According to Microsoft, it is vitally important performance-wise to defragment the MFT and paging files, however, it is only safe to do so using boot-time defragmentation.
Any "online" method bypasses the defragmentation APIs within Windows NT/XP which Microsoft has provided for safe defragmentation, and can result in loss of data, data corruption, system crashes, or even loss of entire volumes.
Diskeeper, PerfectDisk and O&O Defrag use Microsoft's approved boot-time method.
Frag Shield (formerly Frag Guard) is the only one I know which can pad the MFTs to make them bigger if need be, and I've only come across it with Diskeeper.
So I rest the case on that issue.
-
What do you use to defragment the Linux file system?
Sorry about delay been away with work (I'm an astronomer, which probably answers your question about if I prefer Linux).
I dont ever both to be honest, just doenst need it. I'm not even sure what I would do... will investigate now... I love the mac aswell btw.
-
When I read this several months ago I knew there was something off with those statistics but I just couldn't see what it was. I thought to myself, "a 40% increase??? That?s the equivalent of moving up from a 2.0ghz to a 3.0ghz. That?s an insane jump in performance."
The truth is that?s an inflated statistic. Nobody's computer has a 100% file fragmentation. I?ve never formatted my machine and I can go right click on my c drive go to tools and analyze the hard drive for fragments and it says still after all this time, you don't need to defragment.
I still say defrag is only neccessary when your computer is over a certain age or when your hard drive is starting to wear out. If your hardware is older and it runs less efficently you'd be in the position in which you would need to squeeze every little bit of preformance out of it you could. When you hard drive is going out, sectors will become unusable and scandisk will block them off. Then you need to reorganize the data on the disk to be retrieved in the most efficent manner. Other then these there is not much you can do besides peroidically cleaning your machine free of malware and registry errors thats going to end up increasing your speed 40%.
If - all - the files were fragmented then an overall 40% increase in read time over - all - files would produce a 40% increase, but you can see that there is a separate measure for the read time on all files. You won't see too much change in this except during the initial use of Diskeeper 10 Pro, thereafter, as Diskeeper 10 Pro maintains the files in an unfragmented state, you will just see that the - overall - read time remains the same.
If it takes an application 10 seconds to open before Diskeeper and only 1 second to open after using Diskeeper, that represents a tenfold increase in speed or operability even if the rated hardware speeds stay the same, which they do.
Take a good look at the flash demo.
Similarly there are increases to be had when it comes to startup and shutdown.
My start up time (from pressing the start button to the instant when the desktop wallpaper appears) on a 10GB boot volume, is 67 seconds and shutdown is 10 seconds.
So, after cleaning all the junk files off the drive...
Day one...
1. Check the Master File Tables to see if they require enlarging and follow the recommendations given.
2. Run a boot-time defrag on all volumes setting directories at the front of the drive(s) and checking to run CheckDisk (chkdsk) and defragment the master file table(s) and paging file(s).
3. Set the program on 'Set It And Forget It' with the CPU priority turned up to High and elect to have Diskeeper do a comprehensive defragmentation with free-space consolidation and also elect to 'Efficiently defragment large files in 'Defragmentation Methods' in the 'Set It And Forget It', Primary and Secondary Defragmentation Job Properties.
Day two...
Run through the above procedures again to confirm that all is as it should be, and if it is 'forget' about it for a month or two, or until such time as you perceive there to be a slowdown.
It should now continue to defragment your entire drive automatically.
One less chore to do.
Cleaning out old registry keys and removing malware are separate maintenance items which should be carried out regularly.
Like most others I use SpyBot SD, AdAware SE, SpywareBlaster, CCLeaner and EmpTemp to remove Trojans, junk files and old registry keys and I also pick through the registry by hand every so often.
ERUNT/NTREGOPT is used to make registry backups and to compress the registry hives for a faster startup and the User Profile Hive Cleanup Service, from Microsoft, is used to ensure a clean shutdown.
NONE of the drive volumes use compression, as that slows processing down, and the Compress Old Files registry key has been completely removed for the same reason.
Result of todays automatic defragmentation showing a 43% increase in read time on fragmented files...
(https://www.pc-pals.com/smf/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi14.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fa327%2FXPOS%2FDK10-PRO-04.jpg&hash=888698f4de789f8331628c243e1a9890c43ad161)
Most of the other files on the drive (94%) have remained at zero fragmentation over the 24 hr period.
Have fun!
-
There are obviously conflicting opinions on this. I read or heard somewhere that constant defgragging, can actually shorten the life of the drive.
-
The truth is that?s an inflated statistic. Nobody's computer has a 100% file fragmentation. I?ve never formatted my machine and I can go right click on my c drive go to tools and analyze the hard drive for fragments and it says still after all this time, you don't need to defragment.
indeed. I didn't believe the increase at all. I could possibly give it as a 40% in hard disk access speeds but no way in overall system performace and I'm not even sure I could ever believe that defragging your hard drive would make your hard drive access speed that good anyway!