Defragmenters
Every time you save a file,
Windows scatters it wherever hard drive space exists. Your files are then
fragmented, and you need a defragmenter to bring them together. The benefits?
Files open faster after defragging, and defragging can help restore a file
after a crash. But don't expect it to improve overall speed: We ran PC WorldBench
98 and saw no appreciable improvement.
As with disk scanners, we tested
the defragmenters that come with Norton Utilities, Nuts & Bolts, and Windows
95. To fragment our 2GB test drive, we used a batch file that copied, altered,
and deleted files. Next we ran two speed tests. First, we unzipped a huge
fragmented file; as we timed, we defragmented the drive and unzipped the file
again. Second, we clocked the loading of a large TIFF file in Picture Publisher
while running Word, 1-2-3, and Paradox; then we defragged and reloaded the
file. Finally, to test each program's safety measures, we unplugged the PC
while the programs ran, then rebooted and checked for damage. All passed this
test.
| SUMMARY |  |
|
Disk Defragmenter (Windows 95)
PRO: Simple, comes with Windows 95.
CON: Slow run
time.
Microsoft Corp.
800/426-9400
www.microsoft.com
|
|
Disk
Defragmenter isn't fancy. Instead of a colorful map, for example, it shows
a simple progress bar. But it gets the job done--slowly. It took 87 minutes
to defrag a 2GB drive with 342MB of free space; with only 96MB of free space,
it took 122 minutes. Disk Defragmenter also left our drive 1 percent fragmented--not
a big problem, but it should have done a complete job (as the others did).
In speed tests, it performed as well as the others on the .zip file test and
ahead of Nuts & Bolts on the TIFF load test. You can't beat its price,
but you're better off spending a little to get better performance.
| SUMMARY | |
|
DiskTune (Nuts & Bolts)
PRO: Best interface.
CON: Slow.
Network Associates
408/988-3832
www.nai.com
|
|
Nuts & Bolts' DiskTune
looks great--even better than the Norton Utilities defragger-- as it does
its work. And like Norton, it does lots of fancy sorting tricks that the vendor
claims improve performance (we disagree). But the attractive interface and
sophisticated sorting methods don't compensate for DiskTune's comparatively
poor performance. On our TIFF test, the utility performed worse than Windows'
free defragger. And DiskTune took almost 37 minutes to run when the disk wasn't
very full, and nearly 103 minutes when space was limited. Since you probably
won't want to sit and watch the pretty colors for that long, DiskTune's good
looks eventually become irrelevant.
| SUMMARY | |
|
Speed Disk (Norton
Utilities)
PRO: Very fast, gives best
results.
CON: No status bar.
Symantec
800/441-7234
www.symantec.com
|
|
Symantec calls the Norton Utilities defragmenting
tool Speed Disk, and with good reason. Before defragging, it took our PC almost
9 seconds to open the TIFF file; after defragging, it took under 6 seconds--10
percent faster than with Disk Defragmenter and 15 percent faster than with
Nuts & Bolts. The defragging process itself was speedy, too: Norton churned
through a 2GB drive in 16 minutes and 25 seconds, less than half the time
of its closest competitor. Like the other two defraggers, Speed Disk is easy
to use (too bad it doesn't tell you how close it is to finishing the job).
It also performs several putatively speed-enhancing tricks (such as sorting
files by date and moving the ones used most recently up front), but in reality
none will noticeably speed up your work. Still, its combination of efficiency,
speed, and ease make Speed Disk our top choice.
Ad Choices