Windows 7 Defragmenter, just as good as Diskeeper?

[Microhard]

I have been a Diskeeper user for 2 years and recently after I switched to windows 7 I was googling a lot for a defragger. I came across many sites saying that Windows 7's built-in defragger is just as good as diskeeper. Is that true? If it is then I don't have to pay for defragmenter like diskeeper anymore.

*I thought Windows's built-in defrag = Diskeeper Lite

 

[richc46]

The built in defragger is fine for Windows 7, it was made for it. You can use the free defraggler, which is also very good.

Dont defrag too often. 3 or 4 times a year tops, unless you install and uninstall a lot.

 

[Night Hawk]

The free program Auslogics will defrag a drive in minutes even when compared to the builtin defrag tool in 7. Auslogics Disk Defrag Review - Auslogics Disk Defrag Download - Softpedia

Diskkeeper was tried out back in the XP days but found rather obsolete for Vista with the SuperFetch keeping the drives maintained in low key and still low fragmentation seen with 7. The Auslogics program however simply works at a much faster pace then seen with anything else.

 

[JonM33]

I have been a Diskeeper user for 2 years and recently after I switched to windows 7 I was googling a lot for a defragger. I came across many sites saying that Windows 7's built-in defragger is just as good as diskeeper. Is that true? If it is then I don't have to pay for defragmenter like diskeeper anymore.

*I thought Windows's built-in defrag = Diskeeper Lite

Don't ever worry about defragging again.

http://www.winsupersite.com/showcase/winvista_ff_auto_defrag.asp

There is a reason Microsoft made it automatic right out of the box. So people can stop worrying about it.

 

[Night Hawk]

Having multiple drives installed here as well as moving files back and forth between them at times the fragmentation level will still jump up a little from 0% where a quick run of the Auslogics program will take care of that.

Other that this however the W7 defrag tool is generally keeping everything but the system reserved partition at 0% on all drives. That however was just found with a 9% level as seen in the attached image. The monthly scheduled defrag of course has taken care of the rest in the meantime.

 

[Layback Bear]

When I had XP-PRO-SP3 I used Diskeeper 10 Pro Premier and it worked great. Now I'm using Windows 7 defragger and set it to manual. It works great the best I can tell. How often one should use it is up to each person. I used it to defrag about a week ago and just checked and I'm still 0% defraged so I did not defraged. You can check as often as you like and then decide weather or not to defrag. Simple, precise, check-able, done.

 

[Night Hawk]

The typical defrag seen here is first seen following any clean install of Windows such as for the new build now running and following the monthly review on the status of all drives to see what if any fragmentation is seen. For that you simply click the analyse button or view what the automatic scan displays for a level.

Generally since Vista with the SuperFetch once Windows detects any level of fragmentation it preloads the defrag tool in the background where you never even notice it running. If the level does climb due to some files being stubbornly fragmented then you would use a program like the free Auslogics mentioned earlier to see what can be done with that.

Note that last part is when you have a large number or large files being moved, copied, created, deleted, even downloaded, or following a series of programs being added or removed. All that tends to change the environment somewhat on any drive which in most cases Windows will compensate for.

 

[techcal]

Well, the native defragger lacks the ability to defrag system files, needs 15% or more disk space to defrag, is quite slow, lacks a drive map and does not have the fragmentation prevention algorithms. So, if these features are important to you, then you might find the third party utility more useful.

 

[Fathther Jack]

Don't ever worry about defragging again.

http://www.winsupersite.com/showcase/winvista_ff_auto_defrag.asp

There is a reason Microsoft made it automatic right out of the box. So people can stop worrying about it.

Meanwhile,,, I bought O&O Defrag, so I'm bl**dy well using it !!

 

[Layback Bear]

All defrag programs need free space. No there is no pretty little colored boxes jumping around. It just defrags. I have never had it to be slow by much, may be a couple of minutes. Could be the built in defrag is a little more complete, I don't really know.

 

[logicearth]

Well, the native defragger lacks the ability to defrag system files

No it doesn't.

needs 15% or more disk space to defrag

You need free space to defrag with anything else.

is quite slow

Its not meant to be watched, its meant to run in the background with low priority.

lacks a drive map

Doesn't need it. The whole point of its design and implementation is to get people to stop worrying about it. It really doesn't need to be watched over.

Can read more about it here:
http://blogs.msdn.com/b/e7/archive/...d-engineering-the-windows-7-improvements.aspx

 

[Night Hawk]

XP first saw the PreFetch memory management tool but lacked the automatic self maintainence for drives. There you always had to run the analyzer on occasions to see how much if any fragmentation was seen. With Vista's SuperFetch and now 7 low key is exactly how the defrag tool runs while in the background once Windows detects a certain level of fragmentation.

The first program other then the defrag tool you can watch due to how fast it works is the free Auslogics program. That moves like lightning when you compare that one to any others even Diskkeeper.

On occasion however when you regularly deal with a large volume of files and even video capturing you will run across files that cannot be defragged but will remain somewhat fragmented until removed if not replaced. No program will be able to defrag those when seen. Yet the files are likely still usable.

 

[Layback Bear]

Thank you logicearth, you said the same thing I did but much better.