Fat Exfat Fat32

In a Windows-based environment, USB flash disks may be formatted using three different file systems: FAT32, exFAT and NTFS. The FAT32 file systemis a mature file system, which is an improved version of the original FAT file system used in the MS DOS operating system. Later, Microsoftintroduced the NTFS file system, which improved the performance and reliability of file operations. Finally, in 2006 Microsoft added the exFATfile system, which is especially optimized for flash devices and resource constrained hardware configurations.

• Fat Exfat Fat32 Ntfs
• Fat Exfat Fat32 Ntfs
• Fat Exfat Fat32 File
• Ntfs Fat Fat32 Exfat

The ExFAT filesystem is an updated version of FAT32 that works almost the same, except there's no 4 GB file size limit, and you can use it on drives larger than 32 GB (unlike FAT32, by default). This is the best, most up-to-date option for working between Windows and Macs (Windows 8 and newer, Mac OX X 10.6.6 and up).

But alternative FAT32 can be used for exFAT even it can not better than exFAT. Is ExFAT The Same As Fat32? The name of the exFAT and Fat32 is similar where both of them contains the word FAT. You may ask if is the exFAT the same as FAT32. ExFAT and FAT32 are not the same but the exFAT is an update to the FAT32 file system with modern features. Feature FAT32 exFAT; Maximum Volume Size: 8 TB.: 128 PB: Maximum File Size: 4 GB: 16 EB: Maximum Cluster Size: 32 KB.: 32 MB: Maximum Cluster Count: 228: 232: Maximum File Name Length. ExFAT is a file system that was created to be used on flash drives like USB memory sticks and SD cards.The name of exFAT is an acronym for Extended File Allocation Table, which gives a hint for its precursors: FAT32 and FAT16.exFAT is a newer version of the old FAT32 file system, and it is a middle ground between FAT32 and the more modern and more sophisticated NTFS file system.

• FAT32 - a mature file system normally used on USB disks
• exFAT - a newer file system optimized for flash devices
• NTFS - an advanced, journaling file system

Normally, USB flash disks are sold formatted using the FAT32 file system. But, is it an optimal file system to be used with modern USB3 flash disks?Which of the available file systems is more optimized for small files and which one is more optimized for large files? Which of the available filesystems is more optimized for read operations and which one is more optimized for write operations? In order to answer these questions, we havetested three different USB3 flash disks using a diversified set of benchmarks.

• USB3 Disk 1 - Silicon Power Blaze B20 16GB
• USB3 Disk 2 - Transcend JetFlash 780 16GB
• USB3 Disk 3 - SanDisk Extreme 16GB

An identical set of tests has been performed on each USB3 flash disk three times and before each test USB3 disks were reformatted using the FAT32,exFAT and NTFS file systems respectively. All tests were performed using DiskBoss v4.7.28, which is capableof analyzing disk space usage, classifying files, searching duplicate files, synchronizing files, copying files and deleting files using a numberof parallel threads. Each USB3 disk for each file system has been tested using an identical set of benchmarks including:

• Test 1 - Small Files Write To USB Disk Test (18,000 Files, 1 GB of Data)
• Test 2 - Small Files Read From USB Test (18,000 Files, 1 GB of Data)
• Test 3 - Medium Files Write To USB Disk Test (100 Files, 1GB of Data)
• Test 4 - Medium Files Read From USB Disk Test (100 Files, 1 GB of Data)
• Test 5 - Large Files Write To USB Disk Test (10 Files, 1 GB of Data)
• Test 6 - Large Files Read From USB Disk Test (10 Files, 1 GB of Data)
• Test 7 - Disk Space Analysis Test (20,000 Files, 4 GB of Data)
• Test 8 - Duplicate Files Search Test (20,000 Files, 4 GB of Data)
• Test 9 - File Delete Operations Test (20,000 Files, 4 GB of Data)

Benchmark results from all USB3 flash disks using three different file systems were normalized and compared relative to the performanceof the FAT32 file system, which is by default used on all USB3 flash disks.

According to the average benchmark results, which shows a normalized average performance for all types of benchmarks for each file systemrelative to the FAT32 file system performance, the NTFS file system delivers up to 19% of performance improvements and the exFAT filesystem delivers up to 7% of performance improvements over the normally used FAT32 file system.

For users required to write a large number of small files to a USB3 flash disk, the NTFS file system can deliver up to 40% of performanceimprovements and the exFAT file system up to 25% of performance improvements over the normally used FAT32 file system.

For users required to read a large number of small files from a USB3 flash disk, the NTFS file system can deliver up to 10% of performanceimprovements and the exFAT file system up to 2% of performance improvements over the normally used FAT32 file system.

For users required to write medium-sized files to a USB3 flash disk, the situation changes and the exFAT file system takes the lead withup to 4% of performance improvements over the normally used FAT32 file system while the NTFS file system drops 1% below.

When reading medium-sized files from a USB3 flash disk, the exFAT file system delivers up to 9% of performance improvements and the NTFSfile system delivers up to 5% of performance improvements over the FAT32 file system.

When writing a small number of large files to a USB3 disk, the mature FAT32 file system outperforms the exFAT file system by 2% and the NTFSfile system by 11% making it clear that the NTFS and exFAT file systems are more optimized for large numbers of small files while the simplerFAT32 file system takes the lead when working with a small number of large files.

Mac os high sierra microsoft word. Downie 2 4 download free. When reading a small number of large files from a USB3 disk, all three file system performed almost identically with a small 2% performanceimprovement for the exFAT file system and an even smaller 1% performance improvement for the NTFS file system. Optimage 3 3 16. Osx disk utility restore.

For disk space analysis and file classification operations, which mostly require to read directory structures from the USB3 disk, the simplerFAT32 file system takes the lead with up to 10% performance improvements over the exFAT and NTFS file systems. Better screen capture.

Gambling slot machines. For duplicate files search operations, which require a large number of random read operations, the NTFS file system delivers up to 40% ofperformance improvements over the normally used FAT32 file system, while the exFAT file system drops 2% below. All piano midi.

For file delete operations, the NTFS file system delivers up to 68% of performance improvements and the exFAT file system delivers upto 24% of performance improvements over the normally used FAT32 file system.

Fat Exfat Fat32 Ntfs

In addition to the explained performance tests, we have monitored the test computer using the SysGauge system monitoring utility,which is capable of monitoring the disk transfer rate, file system performance and operating system resource usage and generate various types of graphical performance monitoring reportsshowing what exactly happened inside of the computer during the performed performance tests.

For each tested file system, we have copied exactly the same set of files and during each file copy operation monitored the following operating system performance counters:

• File System Control IOPS - this counter shows how much I/O operations where nether read or write operations, which means that these operations are actually the file system overhead required for the file system itself to operate properly and a file system with less overhead is obviously better.
• Total Number of System Calls - this counter shows now many system calls were performed by the operating system in order to complete the file copy operation. Each system call requires CPU and system resources and therefore a file system capable of completing the file copy operation using less system resources is better.
• Total Number of CPU Context Switches - this counter shows now many CPU context switches were performed by the operating system in order to complete the file copy operation. Each context switch requires CPU and system resources and therefore a file system capable of completing the file copy operation using less system resources is better.

For example, as it is shown on the following SysGauge performance monitoring report, in order to complete the file copy operation,the NTFS file system performed 86,243 file system control operations, the exFAT file system performed 87,101 file system control operations and the FAT32 file system performed 109,577 filesystem control operations. Clearly, the FAT32 file system has a significantly higher file system overhead compared to the NTFS and exFAT file systems.

According to the system calls monitoring chart, during the file copy operation, the operating system performed 809,100 system calls when copying data to the NTFS file system,967,800 system calls in order to copy the same set of files to the exFAT file system and 1,144,200 system calls when copying the same set of files to the FAT32 file system.Once again, the NTFS file system manages to complete the file copy operation using less system resources, the exFAT file system comes in the second place and the FAT32trailing the list with the most system overhead.

Finally, according to the CPU context switches chart, when copying the set of files to the NTFS file system, the operating system performed 908,300 context switches.On the other hand, the exFAT file system required 1,362,300 CPU context switches to copy the same set of files and the FAT32 file system required 1,547,900 contextswitched to perform the same file copy operation.

The NTFS file system consistently shows better efficiency and lower CPU and system resource usage when compared to the exFAT file system and the FAT32 file system,which means file copy operations are completed faster and more CPU and system resources are remaining for user applications and other operating system tasks.

Fat Exfat Fat32 Ntfs

• FAT32 File System - if the user needs to work with a relatively small number of medium-sized or large files, the FAT32 file system is good enough to be used with modern USB3 flash disks.
• exFAT File System - if the user needs to work with thousands of files stored on a USB3 disk and perform different types of operations, it is recommended to reformat the USB flash disk using the exFAT file system.
• NTFS File System - if the user needs to work with tens of thousands of files stored on a USB3 flash disk and perform many different types of operations, it is highly recommended to reformat the USB flash disk using the NTFS file system.

In order to reformat a USB flash disk in Windows 7, open the Windows Explorer application, select the 'Computer' item in the left-side view,select the required USB flash disk in the right side view, click the right mouse button and select the 'Format' menu item.

On the 'Format Disk' dialog, select an appropriate file system to format the USB flash disk with, enter a disk label, and press the 'Start' button.

WARNING: The disk format operation will permanently erase all files stored on the USB flash disk. Before performing a disk format operation,backup all files from the USB flash disk to a different disk in your computer or an external storage device.

Fat Exfat Fat32 File

* This performance review has been prepared for information purposes only and we strongly advise you to make your own performance evaluations using your specific hardware components and datasets.

Ntfs Fat Fat32 Exfat

* Windows cannot format FAT32 volumes bigger than 32GB, though itsupports larger volumes created by third party implementations; 16 TB is the maximum volume size if formatted with 64KB cluster

** According to Microsoft KB184006 clusters cannot be 64KB or larger, though some third party implementations support up to 64KB.