Performance hit w/ WinXP Pro in NTFS?

[William]

I've just setup a completey new computer, new hd, etc. Will I take a performance hit by using NTFS since I'll be playing games. Should I use FAT32 instead, or does it still make a difference.

 

[spyordie007]

it really depends how many files are on the HD, if you have a very small number of files and you want raw throuput FAT32 will sometimes give you slightly higher speeds in some situations.

If you have large numbers of files (say a disk with Win XP + IE + Programs + Games) than NTFS is the way you want to go.

-Spy

 

[William]

So, NTFS is faster than FAT?

I thought it was the other way around.

 

[spyordie007]

in benchmarks a clean (ie nothing on it) FAT32 drive can get higher results, however as there are more files on a FAT32 drive it becomes slower because your FAT becomes very large. By the time you get to as many files as would normally be included with a Win XP install I doubt there is going to be much of a differance at all. If you than go and install a large number of programs on that same disk as the OS (as just about all of us do) than NTFS becomes quicker (it handles the large number of files better).

-Spy

 

[William]

Hey thanks Spy.

I'm going to format this 60gb HD in NTFS for my sister. I just built her a 2200+XP system, geforce4 ti4200 128mb, etc system. Hey, look, we joined anandtech during the same month 🙂

 

[Nothinman]

Filesystem performance won't affect games anyway unless the game does a lot of loading, any decent game should load as much into memory as possible and go from there.

 

[digitalman]

it is 6 of one - half a dozen of another. while fat32 is faster, you get better stability out of ntfs. also ntfs is not affected by fragment file the same way that fat32 is. Yes keeping a defrag'd system will aways be better, but overall the performace loss when you switch to ntfs is minor. the other benifit of ntfs is you can protect your system better as it included better password protection. For a pure gaming system, i wouldn't sacrifice the slight performance increase for the better stability. at least that is my 2 cents.

 

[kursplat]

i'm starting to feel old . used to be a question like this would of got you FAQ'ed.
use NTFS.

 

[Nothinman]

For a pure gaming system, i wouldn't sacrifice the slight performance increase for the better stability. at least that is my 2 cents.

The only reason not to use NTFS is for when dualbooting with Win9X or Linux, unless the Linux 2.6 NTFS drivers can actually write decently then that reason's gone too.

 

[mee987]

Originally posted by: Nothinman

For a pure gaming system, i wouldn't sacrifice the slight performance increase for the better stability. at least that is my 2 cents.

The only reason not to use NTFS is for when dualbooting with Win9X or Linux, unless the Linux 2.6 NTFS drivers can actually write decently then that reason's gone too.

i agree. use ntfs, seriously.