Win2000 Defraggers

[Ralf Hutter 0]

What defragger are people using for Win2000? Have you found any performance difference between any of them? I've been using Diskeeper 6.0 but am also considering Raxco's Perfect Disk 2000,O&O Defrag, and Norton Speed Disk. Does anyone have any experience with these(good or bad)? I'm not really hung up on fast defrag speed, I'm more interested in how well disk access is improved (or not) depending on each defraggers' propriatary method of file placement

[DosFreak 2]

Speedisk is the best. Not an opinion. FACT. Been using it since DOS days and I have used many other defraggers. Speedisk is king.

[CM 1]

Agreed! Norton Speeddisk rules.

[DocSilly 0]

Speeddisk, never had a problem with it.

 

Other might point to corrupted drives under NT4 a long time ago ... but I've never been able to pinpoint if they used standalone or limited version in NT Norton Utilities (SD 2001 standalone is included in Norton Sysytem Works 2001).

[ThC 129 0]

I dont think speed disk is the best i think diskeeper is a lot better than speed disk. Diskeeper 6 is a lot better than speed disk Speeddisk is ok for 9x machines but Diskeeper is the best for NT boxes.

[jaywallen 0]

Hi, Ralf!

 

Seems like we hang out in a lot of the same places!

 

You already know my opinion, so I'll just keep my yap shut!

 

Regards,

Jim

[clutch 1]

I love Diskeeper, and hate Symantec products. In addition, I use the network scheduling abilities of Diskeeper (which you may or may not need) and it works very well too. I am also surprised to see Speedisk listed as I usually see Diskeeper and PerfectDisk fighting each other.

 

------------------

Regards,

 

clutch

[Toby 0]

My opinion is total opposite than Clutch's, I have never been able to defrag a badly fragmented drive in one pass with Diskeeper.

 

But with Speeddisk you only have to run it *once*.

 

// Toby