NTFS or FAT32 on my PC?


Recommended Posts

Angel Blue01

How do I get to the Recovery Console?

(I know, boot off the XP CD but...)

I've got XP Home Upgrade....

Link to post
Share on other sites
Jon

Osiris, as far as I'm concerned, after some seriously hardcore investigation into fat32+ntfs since 2k, the only reason to use fat32 is if you need a partition to swap data between linux and winxp.

Its pretty easy to setup NTFS read only in linux, but afaik writing is asking for trouble atm, so yeah you'll need a fat partition for this purpose.

Apart from that, there really is no reason (maybe some incredably old games, that'll run too fast anyway ;) ) to stick with fat32.

In this day even a firewall is not enough to make sure your files are "Secure"

Indeed, most attacks (and the most costly) come from inside a corporations perimeter.

Same for student housing ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites
+BudMan
NTFS is not affected by the fragmentation of the drive. FAT32 perfomance will quickly drop if the drive is fragmented.

Where did you get this idea??? NTFS fragments - and performance can suffer due to it!

Link to post
Share on other sites
Osiris

so juding from other ppls remarks im assuming, that a primary NTFS partition and FAT32 partition can coexist between eachother/

but yes certainly seems like the bulf of ppl are on NTFS

when you boot off the XP CD you can format in NTFS cant you, that will create the NTFS drive wont it?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Ironguy

Regarding have two partitions, one Fat32 and the other NTFS, isn't it true that the FAT32 won't be able to read off the NTFS or are my wires crossed somewhere? Maybe FAT32 can't read off of a compressed NTFS partition, is that it?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Miran

One big advantage to NTFS for me is that you can defrag while running programs (such as eDonkey/eMule). Also there are some things I like to encrypt. In terms of NTFS not fragmenting - this is false, BUT NTFS is much more RESISTANT to fragmentation.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Joel
so juding from other ppls remarks im assuming, that a primary NTFS partition and FAT32 partition can coexist between eachother/

but yes certainly seems like the bulf of ppl are on NTFS

when you boot off the XP CD you can format in NTFS cant you, that will create the NTFS drive wont it?

Yes, NTFS anf FAT32 can coexist on the same drive, on different partitions.

Yes, you can format NTFS booting off the XP CD.

@Ironguy: It is an OS that can't read a file system, not the file system itself. If you have mixed file systems, the OS will read whatever it is capable of i.e. XP will read FAT, FAT32 and NTFS.

Link to post
Share on other sites
theprotege

id stick with fat unless you are on a network...just my opinion...ntfs add security and sharing but other than that, i dont know of much of an advantage

Link to post
Share on other sites
Tikimotel

Thumb rule:

partition size < 20GB = FAT32 will be faster than NTFS

partition size > 20GB = FAT32 will be slower than NTFS

Link to post
Share on other sites
Samoa

I've been running NTFS for a while now. I can read FAT partitions. It is just as fast in most respects as FAT32. I have found some slow downs that weren't happening in FAT32. I like the defrag in NTFS. It is much faster than it FAT32. My boot time is a little slower. But all around I say NTFS. FAT32 for your storage partitions, you can get as small as 512b. I use 2k on one, 4k on another. 512b is so small that performance is hindered. Partition magic 8 shows you somewhat when you set the cache size.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Prasanth
NTFS is not affected by the fragmentation of the drive. FAT32 perfomance will quickly drop if the drive is fragmented.

Where did you get this idea??? NTFS fragments - and performance can suffer due to it!

Sorry I should have said NTFS is less affected by the fragmentation of the drive. :p

Link to post
Share on other sites
helmers

NTFS: Faster searching, better with many files in a folder.

FAT32: Good for very large files, such as videoes and the like. If you use a large cluster size, there will be little fragmentation.

I use NTFS on all drives but my music & videoes. The partition is rarely written to, so data loss is not really an issue. :D

I use 64k clusters. NTFS needs them to be to 4k in order to enable compression.

Fragmentation-wise NTFS can get a lot worse than FAT32, because the built-in defragmenters can't do the metadata. But for the metadata to

become severely fragmented, the drives need to be filled. So if you plan on using up to 50% of the partition, you are in the clear. If not, you should

use a commercial defragmenter.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Samoa

Well NTFS, fragmentation occur more often. You can defrag a hell of a lot faster though, and do it while running other applications. Fat32, fragmentation is less often (to a degree), but is more affected by it than NTFS. If you try playing music and defragging, you probably will find problems. ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites
Jason

Just an easy answer:

If you need Security per file and folder then NTFS if not FAT32.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Solarix

how many times do we have to see the same damn thread over and over....

Link to post
Share on other sites
Samoa

it's an on going disscussion. if you don't like it don't read it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
realmccoy

Use NTFS on Main partition and Fat32 on the other parts of the drive

Link to post
Share on other sites
Samoa
Use NTFS on Main partition and Fat32 on the other parts of the drive

exactly what I do. :yes:

Link to post
Share on other sites
Osiris

Thanks everyone, and realmccoy

that sounds like a good idea indeed.

Cheers.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Angel Blue01

I really am thinking of converting...

But can a really get to the Recovery Console off the XP Home Upgrade CD?

Link to post
Share on other sites
+BudMan
I really am thinking of converting...

But can a really get to the Recovery Console off the XP Home Upgrade CD?

I am not 100% sure - since I do not have a XP home upgrade CD to test with - so why don't you (test it)?? The recovery console has nothing to do with what your partitions are formated as. And you sure can not hurt anything by booting to the recovery console.

I do not understand why you would format your system drive as NTFS and the rest FAT32. For that matter I can NOT think of any reason to use FAT32 on any system that can read/write NTFS - so unless your booting to a 9x or linux system, and need full 100% read/write to some partition on that system why would you not be running NTFS?

Myths;

---

9x/linux can not read/write to ntfs across the network. This is just plain nonsense! If I have a ntfs partition shared out, any system that has read/write permissions to that share can do so.

But I play an older game(s) so I need to have FAT, again plain bull - is the system you are running the game on can read/write to the NTFS partition - than software running on that system can do so. The game could care less what partition format you are using to store its files.

---

Where does all of this mis-information come from??

Example, where did someone get the idea? Less than < 20gig Fat32, > 20gig NTFS

NTFS fragmentation occurs more often?? Where did you get this idea??

Link to post
Share on other sites
neo158

My system is using the NTFS file system and its great I would recommend converting to it. But as others have pointed out it is a one way process and NTFS file systems cannot be seen in 9x based operating systems. :yes:

Link to post
Share on other sites
PaulNC
NTFS: Faster searching, better with many files in a folder.

FAT32: Good for very large files, such as videoes and the like. If you use a large cluster size, there will be little fragmentation.

I use NTFS on all drives but my music & videoes. The partition is rarely written to, so data loss is not really an issue.  :D

I use 64k clusters. NTFS needs them to be to 4k in order to enable compression.

Fragmentation-wise NTFS can get a lot worse than FAT32, because the built-in defragmenters can't do the metadata. But for the metadata to

become severely fragmented, the drives need to be filled. So if you plan on using up to 50% of the partition, you are in the clear. If not, you should

use a commercial defragmenter.

*Quote* NTFS needs them to be to 4k in order to enable compression.

I have read about the benefit of performing a "4k alignment" on a drive before converting. How is this accomplished?

In my situation, XP upgrade and a clean install does not seem possible because it cannot find the WinME OS on the Gateway rescue CD... :pinch: Any ideas?

Link to post
Share on other sites
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.