SG Broadband Community

Just playing I wanted to check out the other File System, NTFS, but it was not as fast as FAT32, I kept playing and playing with numbers till I saw this at Speed test site:


One or more partitions are using the NTFS file system. Although this file system offers many good features such as encryption and improved security, it is generally much slower than the FAT32 file system. You may notice a significant performance difference between FAT32 and NTFS partitions on the same drive


So now you know what im doing, weep, weep, snif

Speed:

NTFS and FAT32 are very similar in speed, but as the size of the disk increases, the gap widens. NTFS actually stores small files in the Master File Table (MFT), to increase performance. Rather than moving the heads to the beginning of the disk to read the MFT entry, and then to the middle or end of the disk to read the actual file, the heads simply move to the beginning of the disk, and read both at the same time. This can account for a considerable increase in speed when reading lots of small files.

You may talk till you turn blue, I told you before it was slower and it is, if you are trying to convince yourself it's not, fine, but on mine it is, lol

You are noticing slower speeds in what areas? File access or in internet speeds?

Net speed Mike


One or more partitions are using the NTFS file system. Although this file system offers many good features such as encryption and improved security, it is generally much slower than the FAT32 file system. You may notice a significant performance difference between FAT32 and NTFS partitions on the same drive

Weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee

Almost there, major improvement for me, look at cache speed and uncache speed: the first one is NTFS, the 2nd FAT32:

Cached speed 259.29 MB/s (153%) 298.57 MB/s (176%)
Uncached speed 3.38 MB/s (82%) 6.14 MB/s (149%)

Wouldn't the cached speed be a lot faster then the uncached to begin with? What is the cached speed of the FAT32?

I had the same promblem with lobo at first with ntfs it does seem slower. I got more ram that sovled it. Also lobo if you haven't tried it yet goto strat run and search make sure fast idexing is on if it isnt. see if that helps

I got a few questions.

Did you convert FAT32 to NTFS or did you format the drive with NTFS and install?

Where are the partitions? NTFS on the inside and FAT32 on the outside?

Have you benched you hard drive / partitions, with a utility program such as HDTach?

earthmofo
298.57 MB/s (176%)


Everyone else im back on FAT32, above CAP and happpppppppppppppy

Fat32 is better on all drive under 32 gigabytes any thing over that use NTFS up to 2 terabytes. if you want to use fat32 on a drive over 32GB you need to partition it

Ploxhoi, 1 HD, 3 partitions, XP on all, 1st partition was FAT32 until I switched to NTFS (Like a fool), so the other 2 partitions are FAT32, so I am using one of them and going to use XP disk this week sometime to take off that NTFS partition and make it back to FAT32

Cached speed 339.74 MB/s on NTFS

I have never tested this myself, but 2 technicians I work with say when you convert from FAT32 to NTFS it messes up the cluster size or something. I remember them talking about it one day. The conversation was about formating a partition to NTFS or convertiong FAT32 to NTFS. They said it will slow the read/write rate if you convert. I will have to ask them about it next time I see them.

I guess if you were comparing the same partition the second idea is out. Hard drives read/write data on the outeredge faster than the inside track due to greater surface velocity.

FAT32 has larger cluster size than NTFS