FAT,FAT32,NTFS benchmark.

[OC Guy]

Just for fun I benchmarked 3 paritions on the same hdd, the same size, the only difference is the file system. The results of Sandra is as follows:
1.NTFS
2.FAT32
3.FAT
How can this be? I thought FAT32 was the fastest file system. Any ideas?

[LostBok]

you MUST be joking!!1 The only surprise here was that the FAT32 didn't come below the FAT16...

Also depends where on teh disk you had those partitions http://www.sysopt.com/forum/smile.gif

only true test would be is you had all teh partitions on exactly the same area.

NTFS, on top of being SIGNIFICANTLY faster is also a lot more stable - if the system crashes you are less likely to "misplace" parts of files.

[NDD]

Actuall, out of three given, and if they were on the same area of the disk, FAT16 would be the fastest, then FAT32 following by NTFS. NTFS is stable, no question about it, but also a little slower then FAT32 due to it's advanced security techniques.

Best Regards ...

[NDC]

Read NTFS(5) Vs. FAT (http://forums.digitalmntsnow.com/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=218&FORUM_ID=7&CAT_ID=5&Topic_Title=NTFS%285%29+Vs%2E+FAT&Forum_Title=Tips%2C+Tricks+%26+Reference)

[shahani]

NTFS also tracks the time each file is accessed and some file properties for security. This slows it down. Fastest : FAT 16, next FAT 32 and slowest NTFS.

[BBA]

NTFS has the ability of overcoming limitations on file access that FAT/FAT16 can not. On a drive with large partitions with a lot of folders/files with moderate fragmentation, NTFS will usually work a little faster. NTFS can be made a lot faster by removing the time date stamp for each file access operation, but that is a registry hack in the OS...so it's really not a file system thing per-se.