New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

exFAT vs NTFS - Page 2

post #11 of 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mello;12262275 
exFAT i believe is mostly used on linux systems while NTFS is for windows. If you use mac os x you can only write on NTFS. Im not too sure how windows react to exFAT but it really all depends on what OS you will be running on

exfat is for mainly usb drives.

extFS is what is mainly used in linux, typically ext2/3/4.

i would say ntfs is the best to use for a mechanical HDD with windows.
Bazinga Punk
(12 items)
 
ooh shiny!
(6 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Xeon 3440 AsRock P55 extreme Evga 8800 GT 512 MB Gskill Ripjaws 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Western Digital Blue Antec Khuler 620 Ubuntu 11.10 Asus vw264H 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
GIGABYTE KM7600 CORSAIR TX 650 Cooler Master 590 GIGABYTE GM-M6800 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core I5 6500 Gigabyte z170xp-SLI Nvidia 970gtx Corsair 16gb ddr4 2666mhz  
Hard DriveOS
250gb Samsung Evo 850 Windows 10 & Ubuntu 15.10 
  hide details  
Reply
Bazinga Punk
(12 items)
 
ooh shiny!
(6 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Xeon 3440 AsRock P55 extreme Evga 8800 GT 512 MB Gskill Ripjaws 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Western Digital Blue Antec Khuler 620 Ubuntu 11.10 Asus vw264H 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
GIGABYTE KM7600 CORSAIR TX 650 Cooler Master 590 GIGABYTE GM-M6800 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core I5 6500 Gigabyte z170xp-SLI Nvidia 970gtx Corsair 16gb ddr4 2666mhz  
Hard DriveOS
250gb Samsung Evo 850 Windows 10 & Ubuntu 15.10 
  hide details  
Reply
post #12 of 16
Windows 7 only takes NTFS and not exFAT and/or FAT32. And even if you were able to format with FAT, you won't notice any real performance gain. The only time I used FAT on a HDD was with Windows XP. Just because FAT skipped the security user policy which made getting around in windows much easier for me.
PC
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD Phenom II X4 925 [3.0GHz 1.3v] K9A2 CF-F V2 [FSB 250MHz HTT 2.0GHz NB 2.5GHz] NVIDIA GeForce GTX 470 [607/1674/1215 1.0v] Mushkin [2x2GB DDR2-416 5-4-4-12-2T 1.8v] 
Hard DriveOSMonitorPower
Western Digital [#1 HDD 12GB] Maxtor [#2 HDD 48GB] Windows 7 [Home Basic x86] Gateway VX930 [19" 1600x1200 60Hz] Ultra Gen-6802 [800 Watt] 
Case
Caseless 
  hide details  
Reply
PC
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD Phenom II X4 925 [3.0GHz 1.3v] K9A2 CF-F V2 [FSB 250MHz HTT 2.0GHz NB 2.5GHz] NVIDIA GeForce GTX 470 [607/1674/1215 1.0v] Mushkin [2x2GB DDR2-416 5-4-4-12-2T 1.8v] 
Hard DriveOSMonitorPower
Western Digital [#1 HDD 12GB] Maxtor [#2 HDD 48GB] Windows 7 [Home Basic x86] Gateway VX930 [19" 1600x1200 60Hz] Ultra Gen-6802 [800 Watt] 
Case
Caseless 
  hide details  
Reply
post #13 of 16
Basically exFAT is FAT32 without the size-limitations. It performs slightly better than FAT32 in terms of speed, but not by much. That being said, when compared with NTFS on it's smallest cluster-size of 512bytes it still retains FAT32's advantage of having a smaller "footprint" occupying only 918kb on a 3.77Gb flash-drive as opposed to the 47.6Mb the NTFS pagefile takes-up, however NTFS still outperforms exFAT in terms of speed more than a dozen times over (max MTU of 46 MB/s compared to 3.6MB/s with exFAT)
post #14 of 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neferius View Post

Basically exFAT is FAT32 without the size-limitations. It performs slightly better than FAT32 in terms of speed, but not by much. That being said, when compared with NTFS on it's smallest cluster-size of 512bytes it still retains FAT32's advantage of having a smaller "footprint" occupying only 918kb on a 3.77Gb flash-drive as opposed to the 47.6Mb the NTFS pagefile takes-up, however NTFS still outperforms exFAT in terms of speed more than a dozen times over (max MTU of 46 MB/s compared to 3.6MB/s with exFAT)

I think exFAT also supports journalling or something to reduce the risk of data loss on power failure.
However -and as you stated- NTFS is far superior in every imaginable way.
post #15 of 16
Use NTFS for the OS installation disk of windows and exFAT for a USB drive for compatibility b/w MAC, Windows, and Linux.
Le Main Rig
(17 items)
 
Terrorbyte V2
(17 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7-6700K Asus Sabertooth Z170 Mark 1 Gigabyte GTX 960 WindForce 2X OC G.SKILL Ripjaws V  
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
1050GB Crucial MX300 1050GB Crucial MX300 960GB OCZ RD400 1TB Micron M600 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
1TB WD Blue Noctua NH-U12S Windows 10 Pro 64-Bit BenQ GW2765HT 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
BenQ GW2765HT FUNC KB-460 Corsair RM650 Fractal Design R5 
Mouse
Logitec G500 
CPUCPUMotherboardRAM
Intel Xeon L5520 Intel Xeon L5520 SuperMicro X8DTi-F 48GB Nanya 1066MHz ECC RDIMM 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
128GB Samsung 830 480GB SanDisk Extreme II 2TB WD Red 2TB Samung Spinpoint F4 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
2TB Hitachi Deskstar 7K3000 1TB Samsung Spinpoint F3  3TB Toshiba DT01ACA300 Seagate Barracuda 7200.14 
OSPowerCaseOther
Windows Server 2012 R2 Datacenter  Corsair 650TX  Norco RPC 4224 LSI 9261-8i 
Other
Intel RES2CV240 
  hide details  
Reply
Le Main Rig
(17 items)
 
Terrorbyte V2
(17 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7-6700K Asus Sabertooth Z170 Mark 1 Gigabyte GTX 960 WindForce 2X OC G.SKILL Ripjaws V  
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
1050GB Crucial MX300 1050GB Crucial MX300 960GB OCZ RD400 1TB Micron M600 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
1TB WD Blue Noctua NH-U12S Windows 10 Pro 64-Bit BenQ GW2765HT 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
BenQ GW2765HT FUNC KB-460 Corsair RM650 Fractal Design R5 
Mouse
Logitec G500 
CPUCPUMotherboardRAM
Intel Xeon L5520 Intel Xeon L5520 SuperMicro X8DTi-F 48GB Nanya 1066MHz ECC RDIMM 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
128GB Samsung 830 480GB SanDisk Extreme II 2TB WD Red 2TB Samung Spinpoint F4 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
2TB Hitachi Deskstar 7K3000 1TB Samsung Spinpoint F3  3TB Toshiba DT01ACA300 Seagate Barracuda 7200.14 
OSPowerCaseOther
Windows Server 2012 R2 Datacenter  Corsair 650TX  Norco RPC 4224 LSI 9261-8i 
Other
Intel RES2CV240 
  hide details  
Reply
post #16 of 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sean Webster View Post

Use NTFS for the OS installation disk of windows and exFAT for a USB drive for compatibility b/w MAC, Windows, and Linux.

If you were talking about FAT32, then you'd have a point but exFAT isn't that well supported. MS haven't fully documented it and there's a whole issue surrounding the legality of it due to MS patents. Further more, the few exFAT drivers out there are all user space drivers (via FUSE) so there's literally nothing to be gained in using exFAT on removable storage aside saving a few KB of storage due to a lower fs foot print.

In fact I'd go further than that and say there's no real benefit of in using any revision of FAT - let alone one that's half documented, poorly supported and patent encumbered as exFAT is - as Linux and OS X support read/write access to NTFS volumes via ntfs-3g drivers.

In an ideal world I'd be formatting all my removable storage in something like ext4 or one of the many purpose built flash file systems, but sadly the only 'exotic' file system drivers for Windows that I've found only supported up to ext3 (and even then, that's only via ext2 drivers) so we're stuck with crappy MS technology, which NTFS is the less of the evils. It really is about time MS put *FAT* to bed and opened up Windows to other file systems rolleyes.gif

[edit]

Just to clarify, that lass paragraph is my personal preference based on my own usage. I'm not about to suggest that average Windows users should be using non-standard file systems. However I still maintain the 1st two paragraphs apply, even to Windows-only users.
Edited by Plan9 - 12/25/11 at 7:05pm
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Windows