HolidayBuyer's Guide

Computer Help forum

General discussion

Vista Defrag tells me that Performance can still be improved

by MarcusRules5 / April 14, 2008 11:13 AM PDT

Everytime i Defrag My defrager says that Performance can still be improved and i have does a disk check to fix it. but no dicez.
OMG HELPZ PLOX

Discussion is locked
You are posting a reply to: Vista Defrag tells me that Performance can still be improved
The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. Please refer to our CNET Forums policies for details. All submitted content is subject to our Terms of Use.
Track this discussion and email me when there are updates

If you're asking for technical help, please be sure to include all your system info, including operating system, model number, and any other specifics related to the problem. Also please exercise your best judgment when posting in the forums--revealing personal information such as your e-mail address, telephone number, and address is not recommended.

You are reporting the following post: Vista Defrag tells me that Performance can still be improved
This post has been flagged and will be reviewed by our staff. Thank you for helping us maintain CNET's great community.
Sorry, there was a problem flagging this post. Please try again now or at a later time.
If you believe this post is offensive or violates the CNET Forums' Usage policies, you can report it below (this will not automatically remove the post). Once reported, our moderators will be notified and the post will be reviewed.
Collapse -
First thing you need to know

First thing you need to know: For 99.9% of users, defragmenting has little to no impact on computer performance. So skip it, it's just pointless wear and tear on your hard drive. If you did a lot of audio or video editing, or ran a large database cluster, then it might be worth the damage it does to the drive, but if you mostly do web browsing and word processing... Not going to do much for you.

Collapse -
does the defrag take place?
by ramarc / April 14, 2008 1:31 PM PDT

unlike's xp's, vista's defrag is a background task (usually scheduled) and you can't see the defrag taking place. also, a defrag can't take place if your drives need chkdsk run. are you sure the defrag is taking place? to make sure, click 'start' (windows logo button) and enter defrag in the search box. click 'Disk Defragmenter' and click [Defragment Now].

also, read this post and decide for yourself if performance improvements after defrag'ing are negligible:
http://forums.cnet.com/5208-6142_102-0.html?forumID=26&threadID=291418&messageID=2751250&tag=mcnt

Collapse -
Hardly conclusive
by Jimmy Greystone / April 14, 2008 1:47 PM PDT

That's hardly conclusive proof... There's no indication of how they measured the time, not to mention if you load a program once, then close it and load it a second time, it will tend to load much quicker the second time.

Furthermore, app startup time isn't really an important statistic to measure. Unless you're closing and opening the app several times a day, in which case I'd question why you're closing it at all. Otherwise, it's a one time deal, so what is 10 seconds over the course of a day? The important thing to measure, is performance once it's loaded. In which case, assuming you have ample RAM, the program will rarely be reading from disk. If you don't have ample RAM, and you're using a lot of swap space, then that's a whole other issue to address. Defragmenting might help, but you'll get significantly better results by adding more RAM.

There's just too many unknowns from what I see in that discussion for any worthwhile conclusions to be drawn. I also think I mentioned high end audio and video editing as being one of the exceptions to the rule.

Simple fact is, defragmenting will only improve performance of disk intensive apps. Most programs your average user will be using on a day to day basis, do NOT fit into this category. Web browsers, word processors, email clients, MP3 players... None of these are disk intensive. Games can be, but usually only in the initial level loading, which is fleeting. And games are recreational, and thus could be said are a waste of time to begin with, so what's the point of trying to save time you're going to waste anyway? If you live in South Korea and are a professional StarCraft player, then maybe my comments don't hold the same value, but raise your hand if you are a professional gamer.

Collapse -
jg refuses to believe microsoft and tech journals
by ramarc / April 14, 2008 1:55 PM PDT
In reply to: Hardly conclusive

which recommend regular defragmentation. even other users who post their own results of the tangible performance benefits of defragging don't seem to sway jg.

to the original poster, investigate and decide for yourself.

Collapse -
Lol...defrag again.
by SerengetiValley / April 15, 2008 4:05 AM PDT

Actually, '99.9' % of users (wonder where he pulled that number from..lol) run less than top of the line hardware and therefore are most likely to benefit from defragging. It is also possible that the vast majority of users do not keep their machines in good shape (system maintenance wise), therefore they are, again, likely to see the benefits of regular defrags.

It's not that defragging will cut down file opening times from 5 min to 5 nanosecs, but you will, at the very least, not lose any performance due to the disk fragmentation 'disease'. Every bit of performance always helps, it's not as if 10 seconds is nothing when opening a file.

Heck, even my mid-range gaming & photoediting rig used to take perceptibly more time to open fragmented Pentax RAW (PEF, 10-20 MB each) files when it had not been defragmented for a month. After I stuck an auto defragger on it and let it do it's thing, there have been no more perceptible delays in opening the same files. Why waste performance for no good reason.

Besides, it's nonsense to claim that defragging stresses out the drive more than normal usage does. It is simply illogical and has no scientific basis.

As mentioned before, either Cnet, Microsoft, Intel, Dell etc are all wrong, or a certain, dogmatic, Cnet poster is wrong. Take your pick Grin

BTW, leisure is hardly a 'waste of time' rofl...

Collapse -
it takes place
by MarcusRules5 / April 14, 2008 2:35 PM PDT

but it says it could still be improved

Collapse -
you may need to use the command line defrag
by ramarc / April 15, 2008 1:12 AM PDT
In reply to: it takes place
Collapse -
nope
by MarcusRules5 / April 15, 2008 12:11 PM PDT

still says it could be improved. think i might need new hard drive

Popular Forums
icon
Computer Newbies 10,686 discussions
icon
Computer Help 54,365 discussions
icon
Laptops 21,181 discussions
icon
Networking & Wireless 16,313 discussions
icon
Phones 17,137 discussions
icon
Security 31,287 discussions
icon
TVs & Home Theaters 22,101 discussions
icon
Windows 7 8,164 discussions
icon
Windows 10 2,657 discussions

HOLIDAY GIFT GUIDE 2017

Cameras that make great holiday gifts

Let them start the new year with a step up in photo and video quality from a phone.