FAT32 Vs NTFS
Okay to all who have been talking about which is better FAT32 or NTFS i have found that they are very similair and what one lacks the other makes up for. First is my PC Specs P3-500Mhz Geniune Intel Seagate UATA/66 8.
Okay to all who have been talking about which is better FAT32 or NTFS i have found that they are very similair and what one lacks the other makes up for.
First is my PC Specs
P3-500Mhz Geniune Intel
Seagate UATA/66 8.4gb
Quantum Fireball UATA/66 17gb
64Mb SDRAM PC-100
Okay i have run windows 2k on a FAT32 partition for over 4 months and just a couple days ago i decided i wanted some more security so i formated my dual booting win2k/win98 system to the following
DISK1 8.4gb
Primary - Win2k - 3gb
Primary - Win98 - 1gb
Logical - 4.4gb
- Games - 4.4gb
DISK2 17gb
Logical - 17gb
- Files - 17gb
Now as i have run it for a couple days now it seems to me that NTFS is much faster over FAT32 when running Win2k. And the security helped a bit aswell. So what im saying is in my experience NTFS is a good file system if you want speed and security. FAT32 has speed almost as fast as NTFS but doesnt have the security. Its up to you whether you spend your time reformatin to get NTFS if you really want security. Just leave it as FAT32 if you dont care about file security
_____________________
:-) Claymen claymen@cyberdude.com
First is my PC Specs
P3-500Mhz Geniune Intel
Seagate UATA/66 8.4gb
Quantum Fireball UATA/66 17gb
64Mb SDRAM PC-100
Okay i have run windows 2k on a FAT32 partition for over 4 months and just a couple days ago i decided i wanted some more security so i formated my dual booting win2k/win98 system to the following
DISK1 8.4gb
Primary - Win2k - 3gb
Primary - Win98 - 1gb
Logical - 4.4gb
- Games - 4.4gb
DISK2 17gb
Logical - 17gb
- Files - 17gb
Now as i have run it for a couple days now it seems to me that NTFS is much faster over FAT32 when running Win2k. And the security helped a bit aswell. So what im saying is in my experience NTFS is a good file system if you want speed and security. FAT32 has speed almost as fast as NTFS but doesnt have the security. Its up to you whether you spend your time reformatin to get NTFS if you really want security. Just leave it as FAT32 if you dont care about file security
_____________________
:-) Claymen claymen@cyberdude.com
Participate on our website and join the conversation
This topic is archived. New comments cannot be posted and votes cannot be cast.
Responses to this topic
Oh yeah, sorry about that. Hate to give hints and not ideas . Do we have a faq here? Is there a way we can setup one with answers to repeated questions? I know that the search function has behaved oddly to me in the past and it may be hard to find the answer to a question you didn't know you had. I use this one the most:
www.ntfaq.com
for most of the odd things I need (i.e. using NT policies on Win2K boxes or funky registry settings) I can find them here. I just thought that maybe we could contribute to a one-stop shopping place for info.
------------------
Regards,
clutch
www.ntfaq.com
for most of the odd things I need (i.e. using NT policies on Win2K boxes or funky registry settings) I can find them here. I just thought that maybe we could contribute to a one-stop shopping place for info.
------------------
Regards,
clutch
I wouldn't go so far as to say that NTFS and FAT32 are similar. I won't dive into the technical details of why they are completely different. NTFS is much more robust than FAT32, and beyond filesystem-level security it also supports filesystem-level encryption and filesystem-level compression. It's much more efficient about disk usage than FAT32 (where cluster sizes get rather large as you approach large partition sizes).
The added robustness is reason in itself to choose NTFS if at all possible. When WON'T you use NTFS?
(1) If you need a partition to be visible to a Win9x installation on a multi-boot system
(2) If you really want to be able to get in with a boot floppy to fix things, you'll put the OS only on a small (1GB) FAT32 partition and format the rest as a working partition with NTFS. This is really not necessary with Windows 2000 because it offers a "safe mode boot" that Windows NT didn't have.
The added robustness is reason in itself to choose NTFS if at all possible. When WON'T you use NTFS?
(1) If you need a partition to be visible to a Win9x installation on a multi-boot system
(2) If you really want to be able to get in with a boot floppy to fix things, you'll put the OS only on a small (1GB) FAT32 partition and format the rest as a working partition with NTFS. This is really not necessary with Windows 2000 because it offers a "safe mode boot" that Windows NT didn't have.
You can also use Erdcommander to boot a WinNT system using NTFS with a floppy. This link shows how it's done and has links for the software.
http://www.ntfaq.com/ntfaq/util14.html
------------------
Regards,
clutch
http://www.ntfaq.com/ntfaq/util14.html
------------------
Regards,
clutch
