Benchmark Drive Bug

[Promedeus]

Hi, I've been using Defraggler for a long time now, and I'd like to say first and foremost it's a wonderful product and I appreciate all the work that's gone into it! That being said, I'd like to help keep it in tip-top condition; therefore, I'd like to report a bug with the Benchmark Drive feature.

 

Problem:

When running the Benchmark Drive feature on an exFAT partition of my main HD it reports random read/write speeds in excess of 900 Mb/s, sometimes exceeding 1Gb/s! As much as I wish this were the real benchmarks, I know that's physically just not possible for an ordinary HD. This isn't only exclusive to my exFAT partition, I also tried the same test on an NTFS partition of similar size and it produced the same results.

 

I've attached a screenshot of the bug.

 

Hope that helps!

 

EDIT: I've added a picture of the bug with an NTFS file system. It happen to be 1Gb/s+ I WISH! Also, exFAT will start to be adopted more and more as files become larger and in general information easily grows out of the GB range. This is because exFAT has improved transfer rates with large file sizes and has a much higher theoretical limit. Don't get me wrong, it's a small difference, but when you're talking about transferring what seems like vast amounts of information now, it will add up and make the difference. That's a few decades off though

 

OS: Win7 Ult. 64-Bit

D.F: v2.10.424 (64-bit) [latest version as of today, 8/1/2012]

[Alan_B]

The majority of us use NTFS rather than exFAT and would only have academic but not personal interest in issues with exFAT.

 

The Piriform developers will no doubt be interested in what you have shown,

but a screen shot showing the bug on your NTFS partition would be more relevant to the rest of us.

 

Regards

Alan

 

P.S.

There is a horrific omission in Defraggler, as shown in your screen shot.

Unlike CCleaner, it does NOT show any of the following

D.F. Version number

O.S. version and if 32 or 64 bits.

 

This might be relevant

[Promedeus]

I've updated my original post with the requested screenshot of the bug occurring with a NTFS file system. In addition, I've added my OS version and DF version.