Tom's Guide | Tom's Hardware | Tom's Games
 |
 |
 |
Hi,
what is the difference between NTFS and FAT32? I've seen people say NTFS is better 'cos it's more secure, if that's the case, why aren't all new computers NTFS?
My computer is FAT32, is it worth me changing it? I use it for general stuff such as internet, MP3 storage/playing, photo storage/viewing.
I guess it would be nice to hear the definitive answer to this whole NTFS vs. FAT32 thing, is there one?
Cheers.
ntfs means new technology file system as opposed to the older file allocation table.NTFS is much better as u can set file and folder permissions and attributes.plus u have the benefits of EFS too.thus if u had a folder on your network of which u wanted to restrit access to certain users it means that your network of pc`s is a bit more secure.
0 
If you have a small HDD or small partition (less than 16GB), FAT32 is faster.
http://aumha.org/win5/a/ntfs.htm
http://www.thundercloud.net/information-avenue/ntfs-vs-fat32/
0
All the "benefits" of NTFS listed above are meaningless if you are the only person accessing your computer and are not using encrypted files system!
I agree that NTFS is more secure for my operating system on my 14GB C: partition, but if I am working on large video files on my D: partition, a FAT32 partition formatted with 32KB clusters is secure enough and faster that an NTFS partition with its 4KB clusters.
It's much more efficient to read and write 32KB chunks that 4KB chunks when working on "Huge" files.
808
0
If you have a FAT32 partition and convert it to NTFS after installation it will not be as efficient as it would be it you formated the disk to NTFS befor installation
0
808, if you work with large video files I'm surprised you're not using NTFS since a FAT32 partition can't have files over 4 gigs in size. I do all my video editing on an NTFS partition.
0
Cheers guys. Although I must admit some of that info went right over my head!
It seems NTFS is better as it better equipped to deal with problems nut by the looks of things, for an amateur like me, I'd be best off to just leave my computer the way it is. FAT32 with a partition installed so as to make C:20GB and D:10GB. It seems that'll be adequate for my limited requirements and it sounds like making any changes will be a bit of a nightmare.
Thanks again!
0
Quick note.
Fat16 is even faster than either of the above mentioned if you are wanting to write big chunks of data.(like audio files and Videos files) Just a shame it does not support drives bigger than 2Gb!
ho hum.
D.
0
I would add that zorki1c's info on conversion is only accurate if the master file table becomes fragmented. This is easily corrected with diskeeper and a boot time defrag.
808 is right on! Nice to see someone else out there who understands this "NTFS and 4K clusters is the way to go" is totally bogus. People seem to not understand that by having a file in many many pieces it slows your file retrieval time. Much better to have your disk cluster size in a ratio of what your average file size is. For example if you have a average file size of 128K having 128K or 64K clusters is optimal. This means a 128k file gets picked up as one or two pieces instead of 32 pieces.
0
Hang on a minute, I'm just trying to get my head round all this! So all my MP3 files (just standard 4-6 minute songs, you know the kind of thing) are better stored on FAT32 then?
0  |
 |
 |
This post is quite old and has been locked from receiving new replies. Please create a new posting instead.
| Ads by Google |
