FAT32 vs. FAT16 (Large Files > 500 MB)

[Ludigdrums]

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!

[Pantion]

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.