FAT32 or NTFS......questions!!

[vnet576]

Thanks allan, but none of those websites really answered my question. I already know about NTFS's features and advantages. I want to know about its disadvantages, and known issues that people have experianced. This is important considering that its a "one way" conversion and I don't want to have to reformat my hard drive if something goes wrong.

 

[allan]

I can think of no downside. It's a file system, that's all. Provides a higher level of security than FAT, requires more disk space than FAT for the Master File Table and may take a little longer to defrag but I can't imagine you'll notice any other difference.

 

[Dirk Diggler]

FAT16 and FAT32 for none video/large media computing.
NTFS for that extra security.
NTFS for the lovely lag, hmn gotta love that lag

 

[2z]

Hi Allan

got to disagree with you on this one

I switch between FAT & NTFS quite a lot & the difference in speed is quite pronounced defragging NTFS is much quicker than FAT

.......................................................

Hi Dirk Diggler

Your right there NTFS is laggy

LOL

 

[Grandmaster]

I must agree with 2z..I noticed that ntfs defrags alot quicker...and I have also noticed that when my hard drive is formatted to ntfs it remains stable a lot longer than with fat32...in short...

CONVERT TO NTFS!

 

[Henyman]

ntfs had been great 4 me. it has much incresed security as well as being more stable with quicker defrags (as well as being not as often)

 

[vnet576]

OK, I'm convinced to convert my hard drive to NTFS. How long should this process take, cuz I need to know how much time to set aside for this. My specs are: 866 P3, 192 mb ram, 20 gb hd, win xp pro.

 

[ZAnwar]

About 5-15 minutes!

 

[allan]

Depending on how much data is on the drive and the speed of your processor, between 30 seconds and several minutes.

2Z - everyone's different I guess, but fat defraggs faster for me than NTFS. Either way, it's not a big difference.

 

[OTE]

diggler what do you mean by lag?? im currently running FAT32 and it seems to be running fine. is a conversion to ntfs worth it?

 

[gonaads]

Here's a quote from this link:

http://www.kevinclements.com/fat.html

Disadvantages of NTFS
It is not recommended to use NTFS on a volume that is smaller than approximately 400 MB, because of the amount of space overhead involved in NTFS. This space overhead is in the form of NTFS system files that typically use at least 4 MB of drive space on a 100 MB partition.

Currently, there is no file encryption built into NTFS. Therefore, someone can boot under MS-DOS, or another operating system, and use a low-level disk editing utility to view data stored on an NTFS volume.

It is not possible to format a floppy disk with the NTFS file system; Windows NT formats all floppy disks with the FAT file system because the overhead involved in NTFS will not fit onto a floppy disk.

 

[gonaads]

and this from here:

http://www.serverwatch.com/tutorials/article.php/10825_1467061_4

There are also a few notable disadvantages to NTFS, as outlined below.

* NTFS volumes are not locally accessible from MS-DOS, Windows 95, Windows 98 and Windows Millennium Edition operating systems.


* Many advanced features of NTFS included with version 5 are not available in Windows NT.


* On small partitions with mostly small files, the overhead of managing the NTFS file system can cause a slight performance drop in comparison to FAT.


* Floppy disks cannot be formatted as NTFS



[NOTES FROM THE FIELD] - There is no test requirement to memorize the NTFS tables either, but again, it's good to understand the "how and why" of it. Also, it is never a "best practice" to dual boot any workstation or server that has sensitive data on it with any file system installed that cannot secure those files or any operating system that threatens that security. This would include even NTFS if older versions and newer versions of NTFS are running and one "degrades" the security strength of the other.

 

[Dirk Diggler]

Originally posted by OTE
diggler what do you mean by lag?? im currently running FAT32 and it seems to be running fine. is a conversion to ntfs worth it?

Well Mr. SCR,
LAG is the small wait that occurs when you want something doing and the system actually doing it.

 

[OTE]

ahh i c now thank u diggler for pointing out the ****ing obvious all i meant was in what senario was there lag?

 

[ModestCargo]

Hey pappcam you avatar stealer!

 

[Binary]

Converting from FAT32 to NTFS does have a downside one should consider: http://www.microsoft.com/hwdev/tech/storage/ntfs-preinstall.asp

Use of a "convert-area" file. Using the /cvtarea option with Windows XP CONVERT allows you to explicitly reserve and place the Master File Table. This can result in a five to ten percent gain in system performance in desktop benchmarks.

Which means that using the convert command in the usual manner will lose you a five to ten percent performance gain.

 

[ironguy]

One issue and a fix with convert

Here's an issue with converting to NTFS from a Fat32 system. When you run convert, WinXP will convert to NTFS from FAT32 based on the FAT format. In oter words, it looks for file address boundaries and bases the cluster size on that. If you have FAT32 formatted system, chnaces are your boundary address is every 512b and this will be the cluster size. See the excerpt from MS for a solution. There's also a program called BootItNG that will align your FAT32 boundaries at 4k prior to running convert. The link to this program is on the page below.


Cluster size. Windows XP CONVERT creates the best possible cluster size according to the existing FAT format. If you first use oformat /A:8, the Windows XP CONVERT process will result in an efficient 4K cluster size, providing better end-user performance than a 512-byte cluster size. (The CONVERT tool in Windows 2000 always created a volume with 512-byte cluster sizes.)


More info here

 

[Perris Calderon]

an advantage to ntfs which has not been mentioned here;

the nt kernal using the master file table, will remap bad sectrs on your harddrive ON THE FLY!!!

that's right, scan disc, or with xp check disc is almost never neccessary when you use the nt file system.

also, when you crash or freeze, and have to force your computer down, you will loose almost none of your work, as the mft is constantly mapping theninformation

 

[melon]

I must agree with that last statement. I have a hard drive formatted with NTFS that is currently dying (hey...don't they all die someday?), and I haven't lost any data at all and can still access the drive in most circumstances.

I had a FAT drive die on me once a few years ago, and I lost scattered data all over the place.

Melon

 

[g7rpo]

Only problem I have is that I used to convert command to change from FAT32 to NTFS and you do lose a certain amount of speed due the the MFT being a compromise rather than if it was formatted to NTFS and the installation being done onto a native NTFS drive.