Recommended Posts

I've read the many opinions on whether or not to defrag SSD's and the predominate one seems to be that you don't need to and it actually may shorten the life.  I have used O&O defrag for my storage HDD for quite a while and it seems to be a very good product.  They are now advertising their newest addition is suitable for use on SSD's.  Just wondering if anyone has tried this, and especially, if it makes any difference with the speed of operation.  I certainly don't want to shorten the life of my SSD if it's not going to speed things up.  Thanks for your attention. BTW, I'm running Windows & Pro, if that pertains.

Regards,

Mike

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

Not recommended. They're probably advertising that, because a lot of people are moving to SSD drives and they could possibly be losing market.

Cheers, Ed

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

An SSD is truly random-access...no waiting for a head to move to a part of the physical platter to begin it's read/write.  It does not make a difference in access time or transfer speed whether or not the data blocks in a file are spread across the drive or right next to each other.  In fact, in most SSDs, the block addresses are virtualized anyway, so the defrag software might get virtual block addresses that are contiguous, but in reality the wear-leveling firmware has moved the data to different physical addresses on the devices to spread write cycles out evenly.

Wear-levelling and trimming of the SSD are well-handled by the SSD's internal firmware and the OS, unless you're still using Win XP or Vista.  Honestly, it sounds like marketing snake oil to me.

Regards

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

O&O are being naughty. Not required at all!

I was very sceptical of their claims for mechanical hard drive defraging too if I'm honest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Non sense. SSD don't need defrag even if they have a so called SSD defrag that's just marketing to get more money and make it look like they are still needed. You can't put data closeby together for the head to read as there is no head at all.

Stay away from this kind of things.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, martin-w said:

O&O are being naughty. Not required at all!

I was very sceptical of their claims for mechanical hard drive defraging too if I'm honest.

Precisely. Well stated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, martin-w said:

O&O are being naughty. Not required at all!

I was very sceptical of their claims for mechanical hard drive defraging too if I'm honest.

I just checked a bit their doc and basically all they'll do is doing the Trim command 🙂

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My SSDs are Intel and I use Intel SSD Toolbox for their maintenance. 

Grace and Peace, 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, wedgantilles said:

I just checked a bit their doc and basically all they'll do is doing the Trim command 🙂

 

Oh right. 🙂 

 

Certain gurus used to rave about O&O, but I never found any benefit to their mechanical hard drive super defrag. Never been a fan of theirs, less so now with this SSD defrag. How much are they charging for this unnecessary tool?

Edited by martin-w

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes its safe to 'defrag' an ssd drive. The OS/Software knows its an ssd drive and really just does a trim rather than a traditional defrag operation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, SoJourned said:

Yes its safe to 'defrag' an ssd drive. The OS/Software knows its an ssd drive and really just does a trim rather than a traditional defrag operation.

Samsung still advise not to. See ”Will defragmentation improve my Samsung Solid State Drive's performance?" here: https://www.samsung.com/semiconductor/minisite/ssd/support/faqs-03/

"Please disable any defragmentation utilities on your computer because they will only wear down the performance of your SSD. Visit the OS Optimization section of Samsung SSD Magician for help doing this."

I'd rather not risk it personally. Better to let the manufacturers software do the job.

Edited by vortex681
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I actually have been defragging my SSD since SSD's existed and while it is true that defragging an SSD (in non-SSD mode) does cause unnecessary writes to the drive, however MTBF lifespan of a drive is quite long and still took me three years to 'wear it down' to where I needed a new one.

SSD's do not like small files and performance take a nose dive when trying to locate and read 1,000 really small BGL files for flight sim scattered throughout the drive (yes I know there are no moving parts 😀), however your best read/write performance is for larger files.

Perhaps it's a placebo for me thinking that by defragging my drive, that flight sim runs smoother and loads scenery quicker, but I haven't had an issue using them. *Perfect Disk is my choice, I found O&O takes way to long to defrag a drive.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, AAN1718A said:

I actually have been defragging my SSD since SSD's existed and while it is true that defragging an SSD (in non-SSD mode) does cause unnecessary writes to the drive, however MTBF lifespan of a drive is quite long and still took me three years to 'wear it down' to where I needed a new one.

This highlights the problem with defragging SSDs. Three years is a very short lifespan for an SSD used in a desktop computer. Take a look at this write test to destruction of a number of popular SSDs: https://techreport.com/review/27909/the-ssd-endurance-experiment-theyre-all-dead. Even the worst drive lasted for 700Tb of writes. My main (boot) SSD has a number of games, several Office-type programs which I use regularly and all of my documents. So far I've written 43Tb to it in 28 months - that's just over 18Tb per year. Even if it only lasted as long as the worst SSD in the torture test, that's potentially over 30 years of writes. You'd have to be writing over 19Tb every month to reach 700Tb in the 3 years it took your drive to die, so it's quite likely that defragging your drive is what caused it to fail so early. SSDs can obviously fail for other reasons but defragging them significantly hastens their demise.

Edited by vortex681
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't disagree, however I doubt it was from defragging, which isn't something I do on a regular basis anyway, but some other failure on my end.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why not use the in-built W10 "Optimise"? It uses Trim for SSDs and defrag for rotating disks.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, vortex681 said:

Even if it only lasted as long as the worst SSD in the torture test, that's potentially over 30 years of writes. You'd have to be writing over 19Tb every month to reach 700Tb in the 3 years it took your drive to die, so it's quite likely that defragging your drive is what caused it to fail so early. SSDs can obviously fail for other reasons but defragging them significantly hastens their demise.

Defrag is just reading and writing, nothing more, just into specific locations. It won't make a drive fail any earlier than an equivalent amount of "regular" writes.

Plenty of early SSDs failed prematurely for reasons utterly unrelated to flash wearing out.

Cheers!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Luke said:

Defrag is just reading and writing, nothing more, just into specific locations. It won't make a drive fail any earlier than an equivalent amount of "regular" writes.

You're absolutely correct - defragging does just consist of reads and writes. But in order to make all of the files contiguous, defragging needs to do many times more writes than everyday use of the drive does. Because there's effectively a maximum number of writes an SSD can accept before it fails, all of these extra "regular" writes caused by defragging will mean that it fails that much earlier. Defragging is completely unnecessary for SSDs because of the almost instantaneous assembly of any fragmented files when they're demanded. SSD manufacturers provide management software which takes care of all the optimising and TRIM functions for their drives so why use anything else?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, vortex681 said:

You're absolutely correct - defragging does just consist of reads and writes. But in order to make all of the files contiguous, defragging needs to do many times more writes than everyday use of the drive does. Because there's effectively a maximum number of writes an SSD can accept before it fails, all of these extra "regular" writes caused by defragging will mean that it fails that much earlier. Defragging is completely unnecessary for SSDs because of the almost instantaneous assembly of any fragmented files when they're demanded. SSD manufacturers provide management software which takes care of all the optimising and TRIM functions for their drives so why use anything else?

I'm not disagreeing with you - I don't see any need or purpose to defragmenting an SSD.

My point is merely that even if the SSD was 100% fragmented, a defrag would add an extra 200GB or so to lifetime writes (trivial compared to total lifespan) and would not likely be needed again (the vast majority of files on a drive are never overwritten). The SSD failed for some other reason, which happened often for early SSDs.

Cheers!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now