i am wondering how does Windows 7/ Windows XP built in defragmentation options stack up against third party defragers like Auslogics or any others.
I would like to see some pros/cons of using the built in defrag options vs third party.
Well, the windows native defragger lacks certain features that are important eg,(a) it's really slow (esp Vista and 7) and can take ages to defrag even a small HDD, (b) it cannot defrag most system files and has no option for a boot-time defrag (c) the xp/vista defragger cannot defrag more than one drive simultaneously (d) it cannot defrag in low space conditions, especially when there are large files (e) it (vista/7) has limited support for the volume shadow copy service (f) no file exclusion list (g) limited flexibility for scheduling etc etc
IMHO, the third party freeware defraggers are no better, and suffer from most of the drawbacks listed above, their only 'advantage' is that they have a drive map/GUI that the vista/7 defraggers lack.
If you really want something that overcomes all the above limitations, you'll need to look at commercial defraggers.
Well, I use Diskeeper 2010 (just upgraded last week from an older version) and it's very good...has all the features as well as a new feature called 'intelliwrite' that prevents much of the fragmentation from happening at all. A 'preventive' rather than 'curative' approach, and very innovative IMO.
You can check out the free trial editions at their website; they work for a month exactly as the full version and that'll give you plenty of time to evaluate. (I always check out the demo version of any software before I buy the full edition).