1. Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

ntfs vs fat32 for readyboost thumb drive

Discussion in 'General Hardware' started by exodusprime1337, Aug 11, 2008.

  1. exodusprime1337

    exodusprime1337

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2007
    Messages:
    2,188 (0.90/day)
    Thanks Received:
    342
    i've got a cruzer micro u3 4gig drive for readyboost, should i ust ntfs or fat32??
  2. B1gg3stN00b

    B1gg3stN00b New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2007
    Messages:
    1,944 (0.78/day)
    Thanks Received:
    109
    Fat32, it's faster.
  3. francis511

    francis511

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2006
    Messages:
    2,547 (0.89/day)
    Thanks Received:
    271
    Location:
    N.Ireland
    Fat
  4. Hayder_Master

    Hayder_Master

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2008
    Messages:
    5,173 (2.26/day)
    Thanks Received:
    638
    Location:
    IRAQ-Baghdad
    fat23 is faster , :ohwell:
  5. AddSub

    AddSub

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2006
    Messages:
    1,001 (0.34/day)
    Thanks Received:
    152
  6. DanTheBanjoman SeƱor Moderator

    Joined:
    May 20, 2004
    Messages:
    10,553 (2.83/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,383
    Fat32 performance is worse on large volumes. However, considering it's a USB disk, FAT32 might be a better choice as random devices tend to support FAT32 and not NTFS. Additionally hotswapping is easier.

    I don't think readyboost will care much either way. Look for some benchmarks I'd say.
  7. Hayder_Master

    Hayder_Master

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2008
    Messages:
    5,173 (2.26/day)
    Thanks Received:
    638
    Location:
    IRAQ-Baghdad
    +1 fat32 can't read 4g file size
  8. Tatty_One

    Tatty_One Senior Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2006
    Messages:
    16,421 (5.27/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,357
    Location:
    Worcestershire, UK
    As said, FAT32 is faster for smaller drives, NTFS for bigger, also, once NTFS....always NTFS so go FAT.
  9. Hayder_Master

    Hayder_Master

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2008
    Messages:
    5,173 (2.26/day)
    Thanks Received:
    638
    Location:
    IRAQ-Baghdad
    so what about ssd drive it is same thing , i don't think so
  10. Tatty_One

    Tatty_One Senior Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2006
    Messages:
    16,421 (5.27/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,357
    Location:
    Worcestershire, UK
    You dont normally get Biiiggggg SS drives so IMO it would be foolish to use NTFS as file access times are slower which kind of defeats the object. My 80gig drive is FAT32, my 250gig drive is NTFS. At the end of the day it's about personal choice tho.
  11. alexp999

    alexp999 Staff

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2007
    Messages:
    8,045 (3.14/day)
    Thanks Received:
    862
    Location:
    Dorset, UK
    Just out of interest, is this for your rig in the System specs? IMO, you really wont need it, and TBH with 2gb of ram at that speed I cant imagine you will see any difference. Feel free to give it a go tho. Maybe do some benches to compare.
  12. Hayder_Master

    Hayder_Master

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2008
    Messages:
    5,173 (2.26/day)
    Thanks Received:
    638
    Location:
    IRAQ-Baghdad
    interesting , cuz i have an idea which is it buy small ssd like 16g and put only windows on it , and my slave 320 hd , so it is good or not , as you say sure im use fat32 with ssd :D
  13. Tatty_One

    Tatty_One Senior Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2006
    Messages:
    16,421 (5.27/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,357
    Location:
    Worcestershire, UK
    Yes that would be good but TBH, for performance you can buy the cheapest smallest 2nd hand SATA drive and just allocate the page file to that drive and apparently you will get upto a 15% speed increase by just doing that.......supposidly it is good NOT to have your page file on the same physical disk (unless partitioned) as your OS.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guest)

Share This Page