FAT32 vs. FAT16 (Large Files > 500 MB)
FAT16 is supposed to be faster for large sequential file reads than FAT32 because of larger cluster sizes. So, in using a system for large photoshop files (> 500 MB) what is the best configuration for the hard drives?! There are 2 SCSI HD's both 8.5 GB. Should the system files be on a FAT32, and the Scratch disk & Swap file on FAT16, etc. Which is the best configuration for the fastest opening and closing of such a large file. Also, FAT32 can have clusters larger than 4K, like up to 16K. Shouldn't that (based on the larger FAT16 cluster) also speed things up? Thanks for the input!
FAT16 is faster, but has a lot of limitations like the 2.something gigs partition and takes a lot of space, specially on its limits. If you gotta use those drives I really recomend you to use FAT32. If you are using win98 you shouldn't have any performance problems with FAT32 (or any that can be noticed between 16-32), but if it is Win95 OSR2.x who knows.
New Security Features Planned for Firefox 4
Another Laptop Theft Exposes 21K Patients' Data
Oracle Hits to Road to Pitch Data Center Plans
Microsoft Preps Array of Windows Patches
Microsoft Nears IE9 Beta With Final Preview
Simplified Analytics Improve CRM, BI Tools
Android Passes RIM as Top Mobile OS in 2Q
VMware Updates Hyperic System Management
File Monitoring Key to Enterprise Security
LinkedIn Snaps Up SaaS Player mSpoke