Defragmenting program - Page 2

**=DdogG=** · 05-24-2008, 07:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by msdz

They make it sound like UltimateDefrag is free to use in that article Bamboo but it is only a 14 day trial. Also, a lot of people don't understand that if using a single hard drive and you try placing the games on the outer edge(fastest) of the hard drive you will slow the computer down. Windows files that get accessed the most should be placed there for the best performance then the game files after it. Running a second hard drive and placing the game data on the fastest part of the drive will make the games load a lot faster.
If using UltimateDefrag on the O/S hard drive make sure Windows is placed on the outer edge of the hard drive.
I have used UltimateDefrag for my O/S hard drive but found out that Raxco PerfectDisk seems to make it run faster. May be my imagination though. that is the reason why I use both defrag programs, plus PerfectDisk does the offline defrag, defragging important system files it normally would not do while Windows is running.

isn't that backward? the innermost tracks are the fastest, as the data takes less time to come back around to the head.

**Bamboo** · 05-24-2008, 08:08 PM

Nope, they say that the outer most are the fastest, because the head has to move less. I know it is counter intutivie, but I have hear that many places. They even talk about it in the link I posted above.

And it seems to be a non time limeted version mentioned in the article above. I am running it now just for the hell of it.

=Sarc= · 05-24-2008, 10:28 PM

The outer track is faster because the disk is spinning faster than inner tracks. Regardless of how much faster the inner track is spinning, the outer track will be spinning faster.

Steamers · 05-25-2008, 12:01 AM

And THAT is why Perfectdisk OWNZZ

ScratchMonkey · 05-25-2008, 12:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bisclaveret

From what i've heard, you can't completely ELIMINATE fragmentation, no matter how perfectly your disk allocation is.

Fragmentation happens because a file is in a "hole" that's too small to hold all of it. If you know how big it will be ahead of time, you can choose a space big enough to hold all of it contiguously. The more free space you have, the more likely you'll have a set of contiguous free blocks to hold a new file.

The files most likely to fragment are those that start small and grow gradually. Things like log files and mailboxes.

msdz · 05-25-2008, 03:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by =DdogG=

isn't that backward? the innermost tracks are the fastest, as the data takes less time to come back around to the head.

I have read that the outer edges are the fastest but what you say does make plenty sense to me. That is only if the data that is needed often I guess but if not the same data is needed then the outer edge would be faster. I really do not know but I could tell a difference in using UltimateDefrag with my old computer and other defrag programs. PR would take forever to load maps up till I started using UltimateDefrag. On my new computer it is so much faster than the old computer I can not tell much difference in the load times.
So I guess it really depends on the speed of your system whether or not you are going to see the difference.

Oh, Bamboo. What do you think of UltimateDefrag so far?

**Bamboo** · 05-25-2008, 06:55 PM

I'm not sure. I only did it on my 2nd HD, not my main. It loaded pretty fast before, so not sure I would notice a difference.

=Sarc= · 05-25-2008, 09:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by msdz

I have read that the outer edges are the fastest but what you say does make plenty sense to me. That is only if the data that is needed often I guess but if not the same data is needed then the outer edge would be faster. I really do not know but I could tell a difference in using UltimateDefrag with my old computer and other defrag programs. PR would take forever to load maps up till I started using UltimateDefrag. On my new computer it is so much faster than the old computer I can not tell much difference in the load times.
So I guess it really depends on the speed of your system whether or not you are going to see the difference.

Oh, Bamboo. What do you think of UltimateDefrag so far?

The outer edge is still faster because the angular velocity is faster than the inner track. Even though the disk is spinning at 7200 RPM, the outer track has to make one revolution in the same time as the inner track. Since the outer track has to spin over a longer distance, it has to spin faster to perform one revolution. No matter how fast the inner track is spinning, the outer track will always be spinning faster and the read head will access the data faster.

Steamers · 05-26-2008, 01:19 AM

so larger hd's are faster?

=Sarc= · 05-26-2008, 08:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steamers

so larger hd's are faster?

Not necessarily. A larger drive can be faster if it has a higher platter density. It means more data is packed on the disk so that more data can pass under the read head compared to another lower density platter spinning at the same speed. I wouldn't get a larger drive and expect it to be faster though. It's also a combination of other factors that make a drive faster.

**=DdogG=** · 05-26-2008, 11:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by =Sarc=

Not necessarily. A larger drive can be faster if it has a higher platter density. It means more data is packed on the disk so that more data can pass under the read head compared to another lower density platter spinning at the same speed. I wouldn't get a larger drive and expect it to be faster though. It's also a combination of other factors that make a drive faster.

ok, well I did some research, and what I remembered was exactly backward with what I had read. the outside edge is indeed the fastest tracks (not that we need one more confirmation on this fact), not only b/c there is more data per track on the outside edge, but b/c you can fit more data on the outside edge, where the heads do not need to move as much.

the fastest 1% of a 20gig hdd is the outside 250megs or so.

the fastest 1% of a 500gig hdd is the outside 5gigs or so.

the point is that the higher density and higher capacity allows for more data to be in the fastest section. even two drives from the same manufacturer with the exact same specs and access times will vary b/c of this fact.

a WD 250 and a WD 1000 - you will be able to fit 4x as much in the fastest sections of the drive plus it will not fragment as fast.

**marstein** · 05-29-2008, 03:33 AM

I use Auslogics Disk Defrag. It's free, for Vista and works okay. No problems.

http://www.auslogics.com/en/software/disk-defrag

Steamers · 05-29-2008, 08:44 AM

Ah I see it depends on the speed in w/c the hd spins

back to topic: Unless your defragmenting program has offline defragmentation... I will not yield

PERFECTDISK FTWWW

**Vulcan** · 05-29-2008, 08:54 PM

I use diskeeper, works beautifully.

05-24-2008, 08:08 PM	#17 (permalink)
Bamboo Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: On the beach north of Jacksonville, NC Posts: 3,400	Re: Defragmenting program Nope, they say that the outer most are the fastest, because the head has to move less. I know it is counter intutivie, but I have hear that many places. They even talk about it in the link I posted above. And it seems to be a non time limeted version mentioned in the article above. I am running it now just for the hell of it. __________________ LINKS 10th Tactical Guard Server Rules and SOP * Kicked? Banned? READ THIS FIRST!* Contact an Admin * Nominate your teammates for a ribbon Stoop and you'll be stepped on; stand tall and you'll be shot at. -Carlos A. Urbizo-

05-24-2008, 10:28 PM	#18 (permalink)
=Sarc= Join Date: May 2003 Location: Ottawa, Canada Posts: 4,625	Re: Defragmenting program The outer track is faster because the disk is spinning faster than inner tracks. Regardless of how much faster the inner track is spinning, the outer track will be spinning faster. __________________ JO Guides & Tutorials Team Element - It's who you game with.

05-25-2008, 12:01 AM	#19 (permalink)
Steamers Join Date: May 2008 Posts: 158	Re: Defragmenting program And THAT is why Perfectdisk OWNZZ

05-25-2008, 06:55 PM	#22 (permalink)
Bamboo Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: On the beach north of Jacksonville, NC Posts: 3,400	Re: Defragmenting program I'm not sure. I only did it on my 2nd HD, not my main. It loaded pretty fast before, so not sure I would notice a difference. __________________ LINKS 10th Tactical Guard Server Rules and SOP * Kicked? Banned? READ THIS FIRST!* Contact an Admin * Nominate your teammates for a ribbon Stoop and you'll be stepped on; stand tall and you'll be shot at. -Carlos A. Urbizo-

05-26-2008, 01:19 AM	#24 (permalink)
Steamers Join Date: May 2008 Posts: 158	Re: Defragmenting program so larger hd's are faster?

05-29-2008, 03:33 AM	#27 (permalink)
marstein Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Half Moon Bay, CA, USA Age: 42 Posts: 840	Re: Defragmenting program I use Auslogics Disk Defrag. It's free, for Vista and works okay. No problems. http://www.auslogics.com/en/software/disk-defrag __________________ Gigabyte P35-DS3R, 2GB, 8800GTS 640MB, Core2Duo E8400

05-29-2008, 08:44 AM	#28 (permalink)
Steamers Join Date: May 2008 Posts: 158	Re: Defragmenting program Ah I see it depends on the speed in w/c the hd spins back to topic: Unless your defragmenting program has offline defragmentation... I will not yield PERFECTDISK FTWWW

05-29-2008, 08:54 PM	#29 (permalink)
Vulcan Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Montreal Age: 30 Posts: 7,574	Re: Defragmenting program I use diskeeper, works beautifully. __________________ TG Primer - CSS SOP's - INS SOP's

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)

Sponsored links

Sponsored links

Sponsored links

Sponsored links