Quantcast

Maximum PC

It is currently Fri Dec 26, 2014 4:39 am

All times are UTC - 8 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 9 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: Diskeeper vs windows 7
PostPosted: Wed May 09, 2012 11:16 pm 
8086
8086

Joined: Wed Dec 29, 2004 5:02 am
Posts: 10
Hey folks, just wondering if it is worth getting diskeeper pro for my windows 7 x64 Ultimate computer. Or do the internal tools that come with the windows 7 simply make the cost for diskeeper a waste of money? Just asking ... )))


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Diskeeper vs windows 7
PostPosted: Thu May 10, 2012 12:12 pm 
[Team Member]
[Team Member]

Joined: Sat Jun 26, 2004 4:31 am
Posts: 11117
Location: Home Sweet Home
Quote:
Hey folks, just wondering if it is worth getting diskeeper pro for my windows 7 x64 Ultimate computer


In a word...nope, not worth it in my humble opinion.

Nasty


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Diskeeper vs windows 7
PostPosted: Sun May 20, 2012 4:45 am 
Little Foot
Little Foot

Joined: Mon May 25, 2009 5:46 am
Posts: 113
Windows 7 defragments itself while idling. So no, it's not worth it. :D


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Diskeeper vs windows 7
PostPosted: Sun May 20, 2012 2:00 pm 
8086
8086

Joined: Wed Dec 29, 2004 5:02 am
Posts: 10
Thanx for the advice. ))


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Diskeeper vs windows 7
PostPosted: Sun May 20, 2012 9:59 pm 
Smithfield
Smithfield

Joined: Sun Jun 18, 2006 7:37 pm
Posts: 5543
Plus the fact that on an modern NTFS partition, you can fragment the drive to about 40% before you start having a noticeable performance hit.

Someone did this, I forget who. Either way, it was probably trying to point out that you shouldn't be freaking out over fragmentation under 10%.


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Diskeeper vs windows 7
PostPosted: Thu May 24, 2012 12:49 pm 
Clawhammer
Clawhammer
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 23, 2005 6:22 pm
Posts: 4406
Location: In the closet
Either Auslogics or Defraggler will keep your bytes tidy, in-order and optimized. And you'll notice a difference over the barely effective w7 app.


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Diskeeper vs windows 7
PostPosted: Thu May 24, 2012 2:47 pm 
Smithfield
Smithfield

Joined: Sun Jun 18, 2006 7:37 pm
Posts: 5543
kleinkinstein wrote:
Either Auslogics or Defraggler will keep your bytes tidy, in-order and optimized. And you'll notice a difference over the barely effective w7 app.

http://www.maximumpc.com/article/the_di ... difference

MaximumPC says otherwise, using Windows Vista. Well, regarding the "noticing the difference".

I'm also suspect about Auslogics anyway. I used to use them, but I did a recursive run, and it said I still needed defragging.


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Diskeeper vs windows 7
PostPosted: Fri May 25, 2012 10:32 am 
Clawhammer
Clawhammer
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 23, 2005 6:22 pm
Posts: 4406
Location: In the closet
Three things?
1. Did I read you right...you're referencing Vista? Meh! C'mon you know better. :)
2. MaxPC is good but not great. They are helpful but hardly definitive on much of anything anymore.
3. Yeah, recursive runs can be tricky with any app, just stick to one and be done.


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Diskeeper vs windows 7
PostPosted: Fri May 25, 2012 11:44 am 
Smithfield
Smithfield

Joined: Sun Jun 18, 2006 7:37 pm
Posts: 5543
What I'm saying is that I believe fragmentation is not much of an issue anymore as it was in the past, and that currently, NTFS handles fragmentation so much better than in the past that you need "severe" fragmentation before you start seeing a noticeable system performance hit. Not to mention things like NCQ make the problem less of an issue.

If you want to show me otherwise, by all means. But the background defragging in Windows does the job just fine in my experience. And in fact, since I don't see any perceived performance degradation, it's perfect. I don't have to do anything (and a system that maintains itself is a perfect system).

Also obligatory rant regarding Vista...
Spoiler: show
I like how people summarily continue to slam Windows Vista as being an unstable, unusable PoS, ignoring the fact that Windows Me existed, Windows 2000 had a rocky start in the beginning, and Windows XP wasn't any better until SP1 was released. In fact, Microsoft's only less-than-rocky release would probably be Windows 7 (and Windows 98, but I was too young to care), which is just Vista with UI changes. And really, Vista SP2 is a viable operating system alongside Windows 7, and might as well be Windows 7 without the GUI changes.

And I used Windows Vista as my main operating system from November 2007 until Windows 7 RTM was available through academic channels (about mid 2009). Never really had a problem with it. If anything, after some insight on OS's in general, Vista revealed that a lot of Windows programmers were, for lack of a better word, idiots.


Top
  Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 9 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 8 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group

© 2014 Future US, Inc. All rights reserved.