We use cookies to provide you with a better experience. If you continue to use this site, we'll assume you're happy with this. Alternatively, click here to find out how to manage these cookies

hide cookie message
Contact Forum Editor

Send an email to our Forum Editor:

PLEASE NOTE: Your name is used only to let the Forum Editor know who sent the message. Both your name and email address will not be used for any other purpose.

Windows Help

It's free to register, to post a question or to start / join a discussion


Vista Defrag Anomaly


Likes # 0

Vista Home Premium-SP2 on Dell Studio Laptop. Hard Disk 250GB (with recovery partition) -
Disk Defrag Analysis from Command Prompt shows 0 percent file fragmentation ans says 'you do not need to defragment this volume'
Disk analysis with third party program such as Defraggler shows disk defragmentation as 59 percent. Does this make sense?
I'm afraid I'm not very experienced with Computers so I don't understand this discrepancy.

Like this post

Likes # 0

Thats a huge discrepancy.
Just guessing but I suspect it may be to do with the file sizes that each "considers" to be a fragment.
Vista's standard defrag (not run from cmd.exe I think only counts anything under 64mb as a fragment.
If you run from command line you do have the option to defrag all file sizes... something I have done many times, and the new detailed report then shows no folders fragmented etc.
I found with command prompt report that sometimes the headline figure varied wildly, as high as 9% fragmentation (still say's defrag not needed) and if I check again a couple of days later it was back down to 1 or 2% (auto defrag turned OFF).
After a clean Vista install (following a problem that all began with someone asking about a defrag defrag problem unbelievably) I am letting Vista run defrag on a schedule and will see how it performs.
And it all started with this :)

click here

Like this post

Likes # 0

I think the main reason for the inaccuracy of the defragmentation needed calculation, is that the percentage fragmentation is calculated based on the full size of the hard drive, not the current space used, so a drive with only 10% used space would probably never be reported as in need, where as one with 70% used space would be reported as required

I think this has been the case in every version of windows to date

Cheers HC

Like this post

Likes # 0

instal ashampoo magical defrag @ forget about defragging

Like this post

Reply to this topic

This thread has been locked.

IDG UK Sites

Android M Developer Preview announced at Google I/O: Android M UK release date and new features. Wh?......

IDG UK Sites

Why I think the Apple Watch sucks and you'd be mad to buy it

IDG UK Sites

Ben & Holly's Game of Thrones titles spoof is delightfully silly

IDG UK Sites

Mac OS X 10.11 release date rumours: all the new features expected in Yosemite successor