6 replies to this topic

[Tom AZ]

Anyone have any "hands-on" performance comparisons between JKDefrag (free) and PerfectDisk (commercial)?

[Andavari]

View Donn Edwards The Great Defrag Shootout for valuable information.

[Tom AZ]

Andavari, on Oct 6 2008, 02:18 AM, said:

View Donn Edwards The Great Defrag Shootout for valuable information.

Thanks, Andavari. Actually, I am familiar with that site. I was just wondering if, by chance, anyone on this forum had used both of these apps -- and therefore had some personal "comparative" experience with them?

[igt]

Tom AZ, on Oct 6 2008, 02:55 AM, said:

Thanks, Andavari. Actually, I am familiar with that site. I was just wondering if, by chance, anyone on this forum had used both of these apps -- and therefore had some personal "comparative" experience with them?

Hi! I have both JKDefrag and PerfectDisk on my computer. Here are some of my thoughts on both programs.

Areas where PerfectDisk is better than JKDefrag, in my opinion:
1) PerfectDisk has great boot time (aka offline) defrag which makes it easier to defrag some unmovable system files that cannot be moved while Windows is running.
2) PerfectDisk optimizes boot files according to layout.ini file which may lead to faster Windows startup. However, differences in boot times between JKDefrag and PD are not so large on my computer (after PerfectDisk my PC boots only about 4 secs faster than after using JKDefrag, from what I've measured).
3) PerfectDisk tries to reduce future file fragmentation by consolidating free space and putting frequently modified files close to that free space. So, when those frequently modified files grow in size, they won't become so fragmented since they are followed by large chunk of free space.

Areas where JKDefrag is better is PerfectDisk, in my opinion:
1) I find that JKDefrag places files in a way that leads to better general computer performance than PerfectDisk. JKDefrag organizes disk into 3 zones: Directories followed by some free space, then regular files followed by some free space, and SpaceHogs (large files, archives, MP3s, rarely accessed files, etc.). Because of these optimizations, regular files and folders can be accessed quicker leading to a better overall performance.


I personally use PerfectDisk for a boot time (offline) defrag only (when my unmovable system files get fragmented), and JKDefrag for normal defrag.

Best,
igt

[Tom AZ]

Thanks for your comments, iqt. Actually, I've used both programs myself, but for me, it's really hard to tell which one affords better overall performance. Of course, for anyone watching this thread, JKDefrag is free and PerfectDisk Pro is commercial.

Just a day or two ago, I received an upgrade notification and link to PerfectDisk 10 Pro. I believe this was an advance release to paid subscribers, but it may be available to all now. It will be interesting to see how this new version preforms.

[igt]

Tom AZ, on Jan 23 2009, 02:40 AM, said:

Thanks for your comments, iqt. Actually, I've used both programs myself, but for me, it's really hard to tell which one affords better overall performance.

Sorry, perhaps I didn't express myself clear in my previous post. I was referring to theoretical performance of JKDefrag file placement strategy, which should theoretically lead to better overall performance than PerfectDisk. In practice, however, I wasn't able to measure those performance differences between the two programs either.

Tom AZ, on Jan 23 2009, 02:40 AM, said:

Just a day or two ago, I received an upgrade notification and link to PerfectDisk 10 Pro. I believe this was an advance release to paid subscribers, but it may be available to all now. It will be interesting to see how this new version preforms.

I am actually running new PD10 now (received an e-mail from Raxco as well). Looks like the interface is a bit better now, and the speed of defrag is noticeably faster than in PD2008.

Regards,
igt

P.S. Sorry, sometimes my English is not good, because English is not my first language.

[Tom AZ]

igt, on Jan 23 2009, 11:53 PM, said:

I am actually running new PD10 now (received an e-mail from Raxco as well). Looks like the interface is a bit better now, and the speed of defrag is noticeably faster than in PD2008.

Regards,
igt

P.S. Sorry, sometimes my English is not good, because English is not my first language.

I also have it installed, but haven't tried degragging with it yet. I'm anxious to do that in the next day or two.

P.S. Your English is just fine -- no problem at all.