I seem to have an issue with my new version of 360 version 5.1.0.29.
Whenever I go to disc optimization it does the check then tells me that neither drives C or D need optimizing as they are both at 0% fragmentation which I know could not be the case as no PC can be THAT good. I mean I look after PC and do regular defrags and registry clean ups but they can't be keeping it THAT in tune. Not sure if it's just me or if anyone else has had this same issue and knows what's up with it.
I seem to have an issue with my new version of 360 version 5.1.0.29.
Whenever I go to disc optimization it does the check then tells me that neither drives C or D need optimizing as they are both at 0% fragmentation which I know could not be the case as no PC can be THAT good. I mean I look after PC and do regular defrags and registry clean ups but they can't be keeping it THAT in tune. Not sure if it's just me or if anyone else has had this same issue and knows what's up with it.
I did as you said and they match, overall defrag of C drive is 1% and D is 0%. I'm glad they match but from the Piriform defraggler I use it always says I have higher, after just analyzing now it says I have 10% defragmentation on C. Not sure if they use a different system for analyzing though.
Defraggler is using a different method to calculate the fragmentation percentage. Windows/Norton 360 is calculating the fragmentation percentage based on file counts ie fragmented files as a proportion of movable files. Defraggler's calculation is based on file size ie fragmented file size as a proportion of the 'Used' disk capacity (as shown for the drive in the top section of the Defraggler window).
To confirm, analyse your C drive using Defraggler and compare the results with the Windows report that you performed above. If there is a discrepancy between the results then click on the Defraggler 'File list' tab and sort the list by descending 'Size'. Are the first file(s) shown on this sorted list disproportionately larger size-wise than the other files shown on the list? If so, then these specific files may be causing the discrepancy between the results. If you would like some further assistance with this, then right-click anywhere on your Defraggler 'File list results, click 'Save List to Text File' and attach this file to your next post.
I did an analysis using defragger and checked the file list and the top is very large but they seem to decrease in a fairly neat way so not too sure what that means.
I saved a text file of the fragmented files and have included it with this post.
System volume information contains your restore points which are very much protected. Defraggler recognizes fragmentation among those files but is unable to access them to defragment. Because the files will only be used for a system restore they are not other wise slowing your computers performance.
This information was very useful for me. I thought that my comptuer is giving wrong result but actually it wasnt the case there. It was due to the disc optimization process from two way at a time. Here is a thread regarding the same issue. They have discussed breifly there. You may check if you want more information.
