I have stopped using the Windows defragger zonks ago and have been using Smart Defragger. But after defragging with that, I tried the Defraggler and was amazed how many fragmented files it found right after. Now I'm wondering just which one is right/wrong? I know Win10 doesn't need as much defragging as previous Windows but I also have a computer with Win7 and even an XP (not internet connected) and was wondering which defragger, or perhaps another one, is the best? All suggestions welcome.

Different defraggers use different algorithms to do their work. I'd say you should use the built in defragger in WIn 10. But if you don't wish to, pick one defragger and stick with it. Otherwise, you're wasting a lot of time unnecessarily:.

Jim.

Or be like me and stop wasting time doing it at all I haven't defragged since win98.

That reminds me of the fable that if you give enough chimpanzees enough typewriters and teach them to press random keys continually for long enough, eventually they will create a Shakesperean Masterpiece.

Eventually, if you don't defrag, random fragmenting should logically end up as UNfragmented. Eventually. :clap:

And, it's not that you haven't defragged since Win 98. Every time you move to a new version of Windows, in theory, you are starting with an unfragmented hard drive. I suspect that every few years, just about when fragmenting is reaching a point sufficient to slow things down, you move on to a new OS, and/or computer. Win 10 may last long enough that you'll need to bite the bullet and defrag.

If I remember, I'll check back in 10 or 15 years - if PCQandA is around that long - to see how things are going for you. :--)

Jim.

Quote:

QUOTE:
That reminds me of the fable that if you give enough chimpanzees enough typewriters and teach them to press random keys continually for long enough, eventually they will create a Shakesperean Masterpiece.

Eventually, if you don't defrag, random fragmenting should logically end up as UNfragmented. Eventually. :clap:

And, it's not that you haven't defragged since Win 98. Every time you move to a new version of Windows, in theory, you are starting with an unfragmented hard drive. I suspect that every few years, just about when fragmenting is reaching a point sufficient to slow things down, you move on to a new OS, and/or computer. Win 10 may last long enough that you'll need to bite the bullet and defrag.

If I remember, I'll check back in 10 or 15 years - if PCQandA is around that long - to see how things are going for you. :--)

Jim.

lol True enough but since faster hard drives and processors and ssds I haven't bothered. Which if you have a ssd it's not recommended.

Quote:

since faster hard drives and processors and ssds I haven't bothered. Which if you have a ssd it's not recommended.

This is why I haven't bothered with defragmenters in probably 10 or more years.

Back in the day, when everything was slow, and 200MB in size, maybe it provided a noticeable difference.

Win7 should pretty much handle defragging on its own.

XP, every once in a while (I clean up my HDD &), I fire up http://www.kessels.com/JkDefrag/ (yes I know about MyDefrag) & let it do its thing.

(In its most default mode: )

C:\>  JKDEFRAG X:

Simple, safe, seemingly. It does its thing. And does seem to help, a bit, & in that respect is needed - in XP.


I wouldn't put much into 1 defragger doing "more" then another.
If it works for you, use it.