By making your texture files contiguous it reduces load times, which has shown a noticeable decrease in stutters in many cases.

Do you have any definitive, objective evidence of that? Or is it just "some people say"? Human beings are too easily fooled. Hence why we need proper, objective testing to determine such things definitively. Just consider the number of individuals that convinced themselves that the latest hotfix for the NGX improved perfomance... despite the fact that the fix didn't include anything that would do such a thing. It's possible to come up with all kinds of technical arguments that convince people of a "theoretical" improvement, but the proof of the pudding is in the eating. And when myself and a number of friends ate the pudding, it didn't taste anything like it was supposed to. Any defrag utility will give you an improvement on a badly fragmented drive. Now show me indisputable evidence that your favourite defrag utility is better... rather than just a technical description of why it might be. Just my opinion, based on my experince but I'm sure the ###### who are desperate for others to validate their choices will wave their arms around in disgust.

I defrag every 2-3 weeks or after an install on my fsx drive (scenery, aircraft etc.) Works a charm and is effortless.

Works a charm, according to your subjective opinion! Now show us objective proof. Once every couple of months, with the basic Windows defrag is all you need, in my opinion. And it "works a charm" for me. FSX runs great. I agree with the premise that defragging every couple of weeks is not only pointless, but it's pointless extra wear on your HDD as well.

Do you have any definitive, objective evidence of that? Or is it just "some people say"? Human beings are too easily fooled. Hence why we need proper, objective testing to determine such things definitely. Just nip over to the PMDG forum, and take note of the number of individuals that convinced themselves that the latest hotfix for the NGX improved perfomance... despite the fact that the fix didn't include anything that would do such a thing. It's possible to come up with all kinds of technical arguments that convince people of a "theoretical" improvement, but the proof of the pudding is in the eating. And when myself and a number of friends ate the pudding, it didn't taste anything like it was supposed to. Any defrag utility will give you an improvement on a badly fragmented drive. Now show me indisputable evidence that your favourite defrag utility is better... rather than just a technical description of why it might be. Just my opinion, based on my experince but I'm sure the ###### who are desperate for others to validate their choices will wave their arms around in disgust.

It made a noticeable difference for me. After installing well over 100GB of scenery and addons, FSX was choppy as hell. Frame rates were in the 20-25 range. After defragging alone, I now get a constant 30 fps in the NGX and it is as smooth as silk. Is it worth the 5fps? In the NGX, everything helps, and it is no hassle, so yes. Is it worth it for less fps planes? YMMV. Is it worth it for smoothness of frames. Hell yes. So, not just objective. You have to remember that ther are som many variables when setting up FSX. It is a complicated beast. Users' systems vary in performance wildly, and there is a myriad of ways that you can configure/set it up. So, if you find it doesn't work for you then don't use it. Simple as that. For me, I find it works well for everything on my system, not just FSX. Don't care about my HDD ware tbh. I've never had one 'ware out' in the 20 odd years of owning a pc. I defrag all of my drive on a bi-monthly basis becasue I use my PC for everything, not just FSX. If nothing changed, I would defrag it, as it is blatantly obvious that you wouldn't need to. However, with Windows everything changes on a daily basis, particularly when you move and delete large files a lot as I do for work. I'm not a fanboi, as you choose to label me (offensive in my book), I just know how to use a pc as it is what I do for a living. I could equally label you as an 'anti-fanboi' for not actually doing the test yourself with a decent defragger. But I wont...

Do you have any definitive, objective evidence of that? Or is it just "some people say"? Human beings are too easily fooled. Hence why we need proper, objective testing to determine such things definitively. Just consider the number of individuals that convinced themselves that the latest hotfix for the NGX improved perfomance... despite the fact that the fix didn't include anything that would do such a thing. It's possible to come up with all kinds of technical arguments that convince people of a "theoretical" improvement, but the proof of the pudding is in the eating. And when myself and a number of friends ate the pudding, it didn't taste anything like it was supposed to. Any defrag utility will give you an improvement on a badly fragmented drive. Now show me indisputable evidence that your favourite defrag utility is better... rather than just a technical description of why it might be. Just my opinion, based on my experince but I'm sure the ###### who are desperate for others to validate their choices will wave their arms around in disgust.

Exactly what evidence would you accept? A list of cpu serial numbers from every PC that it's happened on and 720p before/after videos showing the reduction in stutters? Please tell me exactly where in "which has shown a noticeable decrease in stutters in many cases" you saw me say I heard that somebody thought it helped them. I could just as easily ask for proof from you that it doesn't help anyone at all.

Do you have any definitive, objective evidence of that? Or is it just "some people say"? Human beings are too easily fooled. Hence why we need proper, objective testing to determine such things definitively. Just consider the number of individuals that convinced themselves that the latest hotfix for the NGX improved perfomance... despite the fact that the fix didn't include anything that would do such a thing. It's possible to come up with all kinds of technical arguments that convince people of a "theoretical" improvement, but the proof of the pudding is in the eating. And when myself and a number of friends ate the pudding, it didn't taste anything like it was supposed to. Any defrag utility will give you an improvement on a badly fragmented drive. Now show me indisputable evidence that your favourite defrag utility is better... rather than just a technical description of why it might be. Just my opinion, based on my experince but I'm sure the ###### who are desperate for others to validate their choices will wave their arms around in disgust.

I suppose I must stress that I am not saying O & O defrag is the best, in fact I only use it because I have been using it for many years,. It does have features that are useless , but it is simplistic as a general purpose defragger.If I was not a flight simmer, I would find the windows defrag fine, and would use it without too much concern, but as I prefer just a few more options than what the windows version can offer, I use a third party version.

It made a noticeable difference for me. After installing well over 100GB of scenery and addons, FSX was choppy as hell. Frame rates were in the 20-25 range. After defragging alone, I now get a constant 30 fps in the NGX and it is as smooth as silk.

But that doesn't tell you anything If you had defraged with the basic Windows defrag you may have got the same results.

But if you defrag on a regular basis, and do not do a lot of file copying/deleting, it would be hard to notice any change in performance. Only when your HDD get's badly fragmented are you going to notice an increase in read/write performance.As I stated above, if I was to copy/install a large photoscenery, the first thing I would do is run my defragger, but for general use, it is only necessary as part of maintain the PC to it;s optimum level. And that includes not over use

If I don't notice any degradation in performance, then my use of the windows defrag is working just fine. And I don't need O&O do I? When it has been badly fragmented, the Windows defrag has worked just fine... so now show me evidence as to why I need O&O.Thats evidence, not subjective opinion.

Your argument tells us nothing either. Have you used Utimate Defrag with contiguous file placing? Have you used Utimate Defrag with drive optimisation? These are the things that make the difference for me. O&O doesn't have that, which is why PMDG recommend it. I had O&O before UD and I got similar performance as the windows defagger. Hell, I even once told Tabs that UD was better than O&O, and he didn't believe me. Now they recommend it!! (I'll let him off though, as he's a nice chap ). Ok, fps increase is only small, but 5fps in my case is a 25% increase in the NGX. Compared to the windows defragger, I don't know and don't care, all I know is that when I did use O&O it I got poorer performance and stutters. PMDG use UD as well. Go figure. As I said before YMMV, so use what you like, I'm not forcing anyone to use anything lol. Why don't you do a comparison between the three and let the forum know?? I'm sure everyone would benefit.

If I don't notice any degradation in performance, then my use of the windows defrag is working just fine. And I don't need O&O do I? When it has been badly fragmented, the Windows defrag has worked just fine... so now show me evidence as to why I need O&O.Thats evidence, not subjective opinion.

Why the hell are you sounding like a lawyer ? You show evidence that widows defrag actualy defrags ? Or is it the placebo effect you are experienceing.Your attitude is quite obnoxious, and quite frankly, not welcome.

Your argument tells us nothing either. Have you used Utimate Defrag with contiguous file placing? Have you used Utimate Defrag with drive optimisation? These are the things that make the difference for me. O&O doesn't have that, which is why PMDG recommend it. I had O&O before UD and I got similar performance as the windows defagger. Hell I even once told Tabs that UD was better than O&O, and he didn't believe me. now they recommend it!! (I'll let him off though, as he's a nice chap ). Ok, fps increase is only small, but 5fps in my case is a 25% increase in the NGX. Over the windows defragger I don't know and don't care, all I know is that when I did use O&O it I got poorer performance and stutters. PMDG use UD as well. Go figure. As I said before YMMV, so use what you like, I'm not forcing anyone to use anything lol. Why don't you do a comparison between the three and let the forum know?? I'm sure everyone would benefit.

I will give that Ultimate Defrag a try Ed, thanks for the heads up.

Why the hell are you sounding like a lawyer ? You show evidence that widows defrag actualy defrags ? Or is it the placebo effect you are experienceing.Your attitude is quite obnoxious, and quite frankly, not welcome.

Agreed. If you're after advice then you seem to be going about it the wrong way fella.

I will give that Ultimate Defrag a try Ed, thanks for the heads up.

No worries mate I hope you have success with it as I have. Give the manual a good read and you'll be good to go. If you need any help setting it up then drop me a PM. It's a steal at $9.99 at the moment! Edit: For the idiots on the forum, I have nothign to do with Ultimate Defrag blah, blah, blah... I use it and it works for me.

Agreed. If you're after advice then you seem to be going about it the wrong way fella. No worries mate I hope you have success with it as I have. Give the manual a good read and you'll be good to go. If you need any help setting it up then drop me a PM. It's a steal at $9.99 at the moment!

Thanks Ed, will have a look. Thanks for the help offer if needed.

Any time!

After doing some performance testing on my PC over the last year, I can say that both, Ultimate Defrag and O&O Defrag, decreased my loading times by a noticeable margin. Users of high-end PCs with a lot of RAM and/or VRAM will possibly not benefit much from this, because HDD access due to memory swapping occurs less frequent compared to a weaker machine. But as long as you are using a HDD and know what kind of defragmentation you need, there will always be a performance gain.

Exactly what evidence would you accept? A list of cpu serial numbers from every PC that it's happened on and 720p before/after videos showing the reduction in stutters? Please tell me exactly where in "which has shown a noticeable decrease in stutters in many cases" you saw me say I heard that somebody thought it helped them. I could just as easily ask for proof from you that it doesn't help anyone at all

Precisely! Which is why claims like... The "optimum" defragging of your Hard Drive(s) is one of the most critical thing to "optimising" FSX's performance, and is one of the few SIGNIFICANT Performance increases you can get for FREE. ...shouldn't be made. To claim such things so definitively is wrong. It's a subjective opinion that hasn't been backed up by proper objective tests and replicated and verified by the majority. And i doubt it could be! I have no problem if others "feel" that subjectively it's better. Great for them, I'm happy for them. But I don't feel definitive claims should be made when many have seen no such improvements and you can't objectively prove it either way. Some people accept what they have been told, because it comes from someone they feel possesses more knowledge, or is in a position of authority. It's then quite easy to fool ourselves into seeing improvements that aren't there. My choice is to prove a products worth myself, and not just to blindly accept. What we do have of course is a set of instructions, provided by supporters of the product, telling us exactly what we should do to see an improvement with this product. Following those instructions, I see no improvement, no advantage over the standard Windows defrag. Thus, the claimed improvements can't be replicated by me or two of my friends. So I have no choice but to be sceptical. Show me a list of independent testers, that have, as rigorously as possible, tested the software, and formed a consensus that it does offer an improvement and I'll accept that my results are erroneous. Until then it's an unproven claim.

Your argument tells us nothing either. Have you used Utimate Defrag with contiguous file placing? Have you used Utimate Defrag with drive optimisation? These are the things that make the difference for me

No but my two other friends did, and reported no improvement. But I'm glad it worked for you.

Why don't you do a comparison between the three and let the forum know??

No thanks, I'm not making the claim that the third party defrag utilities are better, others are.

Why the hell are you sounding like a lawyer ? You show evidence that widows defrag actually defrags ? Or is it the placebo effect you are experiencing.Your attitude is quite obnoxious, and quite frankly, not welcome.

Huh... Julian, are you reading a different thread? Not obnoxious at all, very respectful actually. And not a lawyer, just a tad more scientific in regard to claims perhpas. Because I know how easy it is to be fooled. When people wnat to see an effect, they sometimes see it... if it's there or not. You shouldn't see it as an insult that someone disagrees. It's your choice, to use whatever utilities tickle your fancy. I merely highlight, that in my opinion, and the opinion of two others, after we tested as carefully as possible... that we found no evidence of an improvement. If there was an improvement, then it was so minor as to be within the margin that could be explained by our fallable perception.