Topic: NTFS Vs FAT 32 and the SFC game series (Read 3500 times)

Scrag · « **on:** July 30, 2004, 12:28:09 am »

My question here is which format do you use? NTFS of Windows NT/2000/XP fame has some advantages with it but in the past has proven difficult to use with some games. FAT32 Win98 and XP is more game friendly but less secure. I was reformating a drive and I was curious if all the issues with NTFS has been hashed out or if I need to stick with FAT 32.

FVA_C_ Blade_ XC · « **Reply #1 on:** July 30, 2004, 12:41:57 am »

No problem with NTFS here,works fine.

Lepton · « **Reply #2 on:** July 30, 2004, 12:45:13 am »

I have NTFS as I believe is standard for XP and have had no problems with it. What would be more likely a problem is if one has a PC designed for Windows 98 and one puts XP on it but is not exactly up to snuff with the hardware requirements for XP.

Wolfsglen · « **Reply #3 on:** July 30, 2004, 12:14:37 pm »

NTFS works perfectly for me, on both Win2000 and XP machines. The fact of being far less easy to corrupt than FAT32 and having better security has made in invaluable for me.

Scrag · « **Reply #4 on:** July 30, 2004, 12:18:55 pm »

Thanks for the response, I am going to reconfigure my OS for NTFS and see what happens. Thanks again.

Strat · « **Reply #5 on:** July 30, 2004, 06:59:55 pm »

There is a differnece in converting from Fat 32 to NTFS and actually Formatting in NTFS from the Start.

I recomment that if possible you format NTFS from the start, then install Windows.

Durin · « **Reply #6 on:** July 30, 2004, 07:02:39 pm »

Personal experience here.. I've used both on my system and I've taken a big performance hit when using NTSF vs Fat 32.

If you have a robust system it probably won't matter but on a lower end rig like mine it does make a difference. I plan on using Fat32 for as long as I can.

Cleaven · « **Reply #7 on:** July 30, 2004, 07:09:22 pm »

Quote from: Strat on July 30, 2004, 06:59:55 pm

There is a differnece in converting from Fat 32 to NTFS and actually Formatting in NTFS from the Start.

I recomment that if possible you format NTFS from the start, then install Windows.

Can you explain this a little more? I was thinking about doing a FAT32 to NTFS conversion on an old 2000 system becuase it seemed a simple thing to do.

Durin · « **Reply #8 on:** July 30, 2004, 07:14:32 pm »

Cleaven I wish I could.. all I do know is that last time I formatted my hard drive I went the NTSF route instead of going Fat32 like I normally do.

With a fresh install I noticed most programs were running noticeably slower so I figured I must have missed a driver update or something along those lines. I went thru everything I did and the only difference I found was the file system.

So I re-formatted and installed FAt32 again and it ran like a charm.

Cleaven · « **Reply #9 on:** July 30, 2004, 07:18:32 pm »

I I know that NTFS can cause a bottleneck on some systems (FAT16 is even faster) but I was thinking of the difference between convsersion "on the fly" and just reformating from scratch.

Strat · « **Reply #10 on:** July 30, 2004, 07:25:37 pm »

Quote from: Cleaven on July 30, 2004, 07:09:22 pm

Quote from: Strat on July 30, 2004, 06:59:55 pm
There is a differnece in converting from Fat 32 to NTFS and actually Formatting in NTFS from the Start.

I recomment that if possible you format NTFS from the start, then install Windows.

Can you explain this a little more? I was thinking about doing a FAT32 to NTFS conversion on an old 2000 system becuase it seemed a simple thing to do.

Your answers:
Basically, there are things done to a partition when it is formated that can not be done to an existing partition that is converted.

Check out these aretickles if you are for good reading:
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;237399
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;810142

Does this help any?

-Strat

Cleaven · « **Reply #11 on:** July 30, 2004, 07:30:28 pm »

Yep, thanks.

Durin · « **Reply #12 on:** July 30, 2004, 08:24:37 pm »

Heh I feel about a useful as tits on a boar. Glad somebody could help you Cleaven.

Wolfsglen · « **Reply #13 on:** July 31, 2004, 07:08:00 am »

You definitely should consider not using NTFS on older or slower machines if you intend to play games etc, as you *may* well get a performance drop. But on anything with a good hard drive at 7200rpm or faster, you may actually get a very slight performance increase due to the fact NTFS fragments less than FAT.

Of course it varies from machine, i dont actually notice any performance increase on my NTFS drives...but i do notice that they get dont "sluggish" as quick as my old FAT drives used to, due to them fragmenting less...

Nomad · « **Reply #14 on:** July 31, 2004, 12:19:51 pm »

Quote from: Durin on July 30, 2004, 08:24:37 pm

Heh I feel about a useful as tits on a boar.

Well if you where a female boar and you had some baby boar's , tits would prove quite useful.

Dash Jones · « **Reply #15 on:** July 31, 2004, 12:41:05 pm »

Which XP uses FAT32 and how would you use it in XP?

Wolfsglen · « **Reply #16 on:** July 31, 2004, 12:43:52 pm »

Quote from: Dash Jones on July 31, 2004, 12:41:05 pm

Which XP uses FAT32 and how would you use it in XP?

All versions of Windows XP use NTFS for the file system by default (though you can change it to FAT32 on install in you wish) Only time you end up with FAT32 on the drive is by either doing that or one of those horrendous "upgrade" installs from Windows Pre-2000 such as 98 or ME

Durin · « **Reply #17 on:** July 31, 2004, 02:03:37 pm »

Quote from: Nomad

Well if you where a female boar and you had some baby boar's , tits would prove quite useful.

boar
n.
a. An uncastrated male pig.

b. The adult male of any of several mammals, such as the beaver, raccoon, or guinea pig. The wild boar.

c. Likkerpig

Hence "tits on a boar"

markyd · « **Reply #18 on:** July 31, 2004, 03:02:11 pm »

Although they say that fat32 is supposed to be faster and that NTFS is supposed to be more secure... I have never noticed a difference... I use NTFS... however if your stll torn between and cannot decide... for an experiment... dual boot your system, one partition ntfs one fat 32... benchmark them then decide which you prefer!!!!

Wolfsglen · « **Reply #19 on:** July 31, 2004, 03:11:08 pm »

"Although they say that fat32 is supposed to be faster and that NTFS is supposed to be more secure... I have never noticed a difference"

NTFS is definitely more secure, you can add permissions and encryption, plus in the event of a improper shutdown, it is far less likely to corrupt data or require scandisk/chkdsk, although there are a ton of other benefits and/or differences that would fill a website lol.

A good comparison and details can be found at http://faq.arstechnica.com/link.php?i=1227&PHPSESSID=af4d98d1823a76e73bccf757b8ce4520

Scrag · « **Reply #20 on:** July 31, 2004, 08:23:10 pm »

As far as speeds go I was unaware of a difference. Interesting. Windows XP will olnly allow you to format a Partition to NTFS based on it's size (I think 32 Gb) If you use a smaller size the option to use FAT 32 appears. You get around this by breaking out the Win 98 disk and format the larger partition to FAT 32. Switch to the Win XP disk instal Win XP into the newly formatted partition. There were a number of older games that flat would not run on NTFS (Win NT/Win 2000), I think it might have been a Direct X issue. If OP and SFC3 work with NTFS then it sounds good to me, thanks for the links to the tech articles though that is good info.

Wolfsglen · « **Reply #21 on:** August 01, 2004, 06:15:12 am »

No prob, its a lot ot get yer head around, that article was pretty good in cutting to the chase in a way that could be understood lol.

So far i've had no probs at all with EAW/OP on NTFS, if you are worried about an older game you can always set up a small and seperate FAT32 partition somewhere for it if it gives you probs in NTFS, but i run quite a few old dos games still on XP/NTFS (either using the NTVDM or other emulators such as dosbox etc) without any trouble either. I had a problem once running grand prix legends on my drive, that a lot of people said was due to NTFS - but i found out turning off the Index Service for its folder cured the problem, which makes very little sense, but hey it worked!

News:

Topic: NTFS Vs FAT 32 and the SFC game series (Read 3500 times) var addthis_config = {"data_track_clickback":true};

Topic: NTFS Vs FAT 32 and the SFC game series (Read 3500 times)