FAT32 vs NTFS

Discussion in 'Windows Desktop Systems' started by atari, Sep 9, 2002.

  1. atari

    atari Guest

    ive been using XP for about a year, and at the time, i was let to believe that NTFS was the superior file system in most respects, so have used it ever since.

    now i'm hearing that NTFS doesnt add much to anything other than indexing and security. is this true?

    will i get better performance out of FAT32? i would only keep NTFS now if indeed adds more stability and functionality during defrag than FAT32, as i dont use any of its indexing or security features anyway
     
  2. Tabula Rasa

    Tabula Rasa Stranger Than Kindness Political User

    Messages:
    3,233
    Location:
    Israel
  3. atari

    atari Guest

    ok thanks.... but assuming i dont need any security features since im not using multiple users, is the reliability of NTFS worth the performance sarcrifice?
     
  4. Tabula Rasa

    Tabula Rasa Stranger Than Kindness Political User

    Messages:
    3,233
    Location:
    Israel
    Use Fat32... you have no real need for NTFS.
     
  5. atari

    atari Guest

    ok thanks! thats all i wanted to know.

    if there are any other opinions, please speak up

    i desperately need to reformat soon anyway, so that would be my opportunity to change over
     
  6. Hipster Doofus

    Hipster Doofus Good grief Charlie Brown

    Messages:
    5,920
    Location:
    Melbourne Australia
    No way would I go back to fat32. NTFS is heaps more stable. Yes fat32 is faster but not enough faster for the average user to notice.
     
  7. natasrof1

    natasrof1 Guest

    Keep in mind, that FAT32 will not install in a partition over 32 Gig.
     
  8. atari

    atari Guest

    ok well im pretty picky about speed, but i think id rather have the stability in the case of hard drives if the speed isnt much different
     
  9. atari

    atari Guest


    before i had XP, i had ME running on my 40gig drive in fat32....
     
  10. The_Schwarz

    The_Schwarz Guest

    Windows XP will support a FAT32 partition over 32Gig, But you must create it on Windows 9x/ME.

    On a side note NTFS has better fault tolerance as well, bad sectors and windows hanging etc and corupting the allocation tables
     
  11. [CpK]Bastid

    [CpK]Bastid Guest

    ntfs much better than fat32

    stability over performance

    and performance of fat32 over ntfs not even noticeable
     
  12. dabomb

    dabomb Moderator

    Messages:
    564
    im running windows 98 on a 100gig hard drive using FAT32 :D
     
  13. Shamus MacNoob

    Shamus MacNoob Moderator Political User

    Messages:
    4,199
    Location:
    L'Ile Perrot Quebec
    either one

    I used ntfs for mmmmmm about 6 monthes and now I am on fat32 tried both had to see what was what , either one is fine I dont need to hide stuff and I dont see my fat32 crashing and being unstable so I am gonna stay with fat32 for now but either one is fine
     
  14. WAM

    WAM Guest

    I must admit games seem to play better and/or are more stable on fat32 (?). So ive got a hdd dedicated to games as FAT 32, and four other hdds as NTFS. Have not had any problems in XP withthis set up.
     
  15. Stiertje

    Stiertje Guest

    And what do you think the wasted space on your HD is now? Every file of 1 kb tekst for instance will take up 24 kb on your hardrive, and there are LOTS of small files on a normal computer disk. For HD's over 8 GB and using FAT32 it is advisable to create multiple partitions of max 8 GB, which is the most economical size for FAT32. Allocation of files can only loose max 4 kb per file on a 8 GB partition.
     
  16. RobbieSan

    RobbieSan Guest

    I'm using NTFS and am enjoying a bunch.. I get good stability and performance.. no reason for me to bother going back to FAT32, but either one will work fine for you..
     
  17. atari

    atari Guest

    thanks everybody....NTFS it is, and NTFS it will stay
     
  18. Stiertje

    Stiertje Guest

    Remember that you can't load a NTFS volume in DOS. So if you ever have problems that require a bootdisk to solve, you can't acccess your harddisk to save some last files before all is lost.

    And RobbieSan, I get good stability on a FAT32 system also. What exactly do you do that causes FAT32 to run so much more unstable than NTFS?
     
  19. 2z

    2z OSNN Gamer

    Messages:
    2,439
    Location:
    England
    Thats really good advice :)
    Fat32 can support up to 2 terrabyte but that doesnt make it a good idea though :p
    XP is just as solid on FAT & if any thing on my system there is less issues
    Only use NTFS if you need the extra benefits it provides
    :)
     
  20. Ah a question answered was just about to say that i couldn't install it on my 80GB HDD, now i guess that's why!