Tom's Guide | Tom's Hardware | Tom's Games
 |
 |
 |
i just added a 3rd hard drive to my comp (WD 120gb 8mb cache) and it won't let me format to FAT32. i have a 20gb and a 80gb on my IDE1 and my cd-rw and dvd-rom on IDE2. i installed the 3rd hard drive on IDE3 but i didn't make it a raid drive. in device manager it recognizes the 120gb on IDE3 as a SCSI device, so that might have something to do with it. after i actitivate it and create the primary partition, i go to format it and it only has NTFS to select for the format type. i formatted it in NTFS and everything works fine but i'd rather keep everything in FAT32. is there anything i can do???
0 
XP formats a drive as NTFS if it is larger than 32GB. You can split it into smaller partitions if you want XP to format it as FAT32, but you'd be better off using the software from the manufacturer to format it if you want a large partition. Western Digital has the free software at their site.
0
directly from the microsoft knowledge base.
You cannot format a volume larger than 32 gigabytes (GB) in size using the FAT32 file system during the Windows XP installation process. Windows XP can mount and support FAT32 volumes larger than 32 GB (subject to the other limits), but you cannot create a FAT32 volume larger than 32 GB by using the Format tool during Setup. If you need to format a volume that is larger than 32 GB, use the NTFS file system to format it.
0
If you use another program to format the disk it can be fat32 and over 32gig, but as Ger has said correctly win XP will not format fat32 over 32gig by itself, and third party software is needed.
win 98 is not happy formating over 64gig and there is a mshaft patch for fdisk to fix this, however there is a loss of performance with large drives in fat 32.
If you really want fat 32, download "partition magic" and make the boot floppys, then boot from them and setup the drive in fat32.cheers
Peco
0
well would it cause any problems have one drive in NTFS and the rest of the drives in FAT32? like compatibility or anything else like that? my 20gb w/ FAT32 is only used for Windows and the programs i install. my other drives are just used for divx, mp3's, backup files, etc... no programs run off them.
0
i believe WD supports a program for their harddrives called lifeguard. it is usally used to format drives if say bios or windows just doesn't recoignize the full capacity. but it can also simply format with lifeguard as well. however i think your best bets from high to lo if you realy want it to keep as fat32 would be:
-saoftware which came with the hardrive
-partition majic
-lifeguard
-fdiskHowever, if you keep it as ntfs there shoudln't be any compatability problems, and an advantage to ntfs is that it allows windows to recogzie "unlimited" file sizes. fat32 caps a file to a size of 4 gigs i think...maybe 8. either way i ran into the problem doing video editing and an ntfs formated drive was my awnser
if you are doing anything that may demand a laaarge file size i would suggest fat32.
0
Tom,......you should have no problem to mix formats on drives, except win 98 etc cant read ntfs. I have duel boot w98 and xp pro.
I run 2 x 60 gig drives in raid 0, so total drive size of 117 gigs when formated.
my primary partition is fat 32 for w98, about 38 gig. my second partition is 75 gig ntfs with xp. My backup drive is 80 gig, 50 gig mp3 and 22 gig backup, all fat 32, then when I boot to win 98 the ntfs drive is not visable and the other drives with mp3, backup etc are available to use. If I didn't need win98, I would use ntfs for my other drives.cheers
Peco
0
hey thanks for the details pecos. that makes me think of something else that has been bugging me. i want to put my 120gb and 80gb WD hard drives in RAID 0 but i've have heard a lot rumors that RAID 0 is very unstable. have you ever had any trouble with it?
0
Tom,
raid is a sweet ride, but there is 1 basic rule for good raid.1)use identicle drives from same batch.
aviod baracudda iv, they are too fast if you have highpoint 372 controller, and the controller usally reads them twice befor it can get the data and in fact, runs slower than non raid setup. Its not the hdrives or controller fault, just wee conflict, seagate have released new firmware to correct this but its still a problem which I confirmed last week when tested 2 new iv 60 gig drives in raid 0, but they could be old stock, who knows.
I have had no raid faults in the last 4 years I have been running it, not in win 98 or xp. the only failure was my own doing by flashing my bios to new raid version, and I expected the stripe to fail, I had made an image of my setup befor I flashed. then i re setup my raid and sent the image back.so be brave and do the raid thing, I hate waiting for games to load, etc, lol love my raid 0 :-)
cheers
Peco
0
haha you about read my mind on those seagate drives. i was just looking into buying a couple of them. thanks for the warning. now i'm just gonna order another 80gb WD special edition and put them in RAID 0. thanks for all the advice peco.
0
hey peco, since we're talking about raid, i have a couple more questions for you. you said you made an image of your drive before you flashed the bios. what program do you use for that and also where did you store the image? also, is there a big performance difference if i run my OS on my raid drive and will i be able to make an image of my 20gb drive with the OS on it and copy that to my raid drive when install them? thanks again
0
Tom, I have norton ghost 2002 and drive image 2002. When these progs install you make to booting floopys to run it, these progs run in caldera dos mode(very easy to use)to image raid you need 3 hdd. (I have a separate drive with my 2 os images on it. this backup drive is only fitted to pc to repair or backup, that way safe and no accidentaly deletions etc.)
1 hdd with you system on it, and the other2 for your raid.
I boot to my floppy and run drive image, and create the image from the raid to the single drive. then I can do anything to the raid, and then copy the image back the same way.
you need to install the 2 raid drives, and set them up, then boot to drive image again
and clone you system from the single drive to the raid drives.
that make some sence?
in benchmarks, single ata 100 drives score about 16000 points, my raid scores 43000 points, have 2 pc for games at home, 1 raid 1 not, loading the same game take 8 sec for raid, 46 sec for non raid. :-) so raid is serious performace increase.cheers
Peco
0  |
 |
 |
This post is quite old and has been locked from receiving new replies. Please create a new posting instead.
| Ads by Google |
