Tom's Hardware > Forum > Storage > Hard Disks > formatting raptors in raid0

formatting raptors in raid0

Forum Storage : Hard Disks - formatting raptors in raid0

Tom's Hardware: Over 1.4 million members in 6 different countries available to answer all your high-tech questions. Sign up now! Its free!
Ask the community Add a reply
Word :    Username :           
 
plonkaclunk   03-05-2007 at 12:10:24 AM

Hey all
I have 2x 36 gb 16 mb sata 2 raptors that i am going to run in raid0 for speed. I am planning on running xp with a lot of games on it. I heard rumor that FAT 32 works better for speed in raid than NTFS. I no NTFS has a whole lot of security and swap features but i just want speed!

NTFS or FAT32 for raid0 raptors for maximum speed

Cheers
pk

Add a reply
Sponsored Links
Register or log in to remove.
SomeJoe7777   03-05-2007 at 03:12:23 AM
- 0 +

There is no difference in speed between FAT32 and NTFS. That is a myth.

In addition, Windows XP won't let you format a FAT32 partition larger than 32GB.

Use NTFS, you'll save yourself trouble.

Reply to SomeJoe7777
choirbass   03-05-2007 at 11:19:35 PM
- 0 +

Quote :

In addition, Windows XP won't let you format a FAT32 partition larger than 32GB.



http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp [...] am_fs.mspx

in the article, is says the largest partition size FAT32 supports is 128GB, at a max of 2 terabytes per physical drive... aside from capacity though, i agree, no performance difference between the two really worth noting

Reply to choirbass
nh484000   03-06-2007 at 12:00:20 AM
- 0 +

Correct. There is no difference in the format of the drive. But when you setup the raid make sure you slect the correct stripe size. Most motherboard supports 16, 32, 64, and 128 kb stripe sizes. Most people would suggest a size of 64k. but it depends on the size of your files and what you are doing. Hope this helps

Reply to nh484000
chuckshissle   03-06-2007 at 12:38:46 AM
- 0 +

Use the default one which is NFTS for stability. I have read any reviews about these topic so I guess it's better to go the safety on this one.

Reply to chuckshissle
choirbass   03-06-2007 at 01:27:18 AM
- 0 +

Quote :

Correct. There is no difference in the format of the drive. But when you setup the raid make sure you slect the correct stripe size. Most motherboard supports 16, 32, 64, and 128 kb stripe sizes. Most people would suggest a size of 64k. but it depends on the size of your files and what you are doing. Hope this helps



yeah, personally i would only go with the largest stripe the controller allows in raid 0, or just a single hdd and forget raid 0 entirely... as raid 0 will only really provide benefit when transferring large sized files, which are guaranteed to be larger than that size anyhow (optimally up to ~15% improvement in STRs then)... which again, brings to what kinds of uses raid 0 really benefits, games almost never being one of them, except in the instance where the maps themselves consist of mostly large bitmaps and such, otherwise, youll see an extremely limited boost in performance (~1 second improvement on average for the vast majority of games, compared to a single hdd)... if games are a concern though, it would make much more sense to get more system memory, a faster single hdd, a faster cpu (or a faster gpu for during actual gameplay)

Reply to choirbass
SomeJoe7777   03-06-2007 at 01:59:50 AM
- 0 +

Quote :

In addition, Windows XP won't let you format a FAT32 partition larger than 32GB.



http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp [...] am_fs.mspx

in the article, is says the largest partition size FAT32 supports is 128GB, at a max of 2 terabytes per physical drive... aside from capacity though, i agree, no performance difference between the two really worth noting

Actually, the largest partition supported under FAT32 is 2TB, limited by the 32-bit MBR LBA scheme.

But nevertheless, I didn't say that Windows XP didn't support large FAT32 partitions. It does. If you have a 2TB FAT32 partition that you made on Windows 98 and plug the drive into a Windows XP machine, it will recognize it and be able to access it with no problems.

What I said was that Windows XP will not format a FAT32 partition larger than 32GB, which is true (see Microsoft KB Article 314463.) Windows XP artificially imposes this limitation to force you to use NTFS (which you should use anyway).

Reply to SomeJoe7777
SomeJoe7777   03-06-2007 at 05:17:32 PM
- 0 +

No need to apologize, my friend. I blame the whole thing on Microsoft's weirdness. 8) :D

Reply to SomeJoe7777
Ask the community Add a reply
Tom's Hardware > Forum > Storage > Hard Disks > formatting raptors in raid0
Go to:

There are 1138 identified and unidentified users. To see the list of identified users, Click here.

Forum map
Bestofmedia Forum ©
2000-2009 Bestofmedia Group
Page generated in 0.317 seconds
Please mind

You are about to answer a thread that has been inactive for more than 6 months.
If you still wish to proceed, please ensure that your posting is original and does not duplicate or overlap any prior responses to this thread.

Add a reply Cancel
Sponsored links
  • Ask the community now
  • Publish
Ad
Related Topics
See all relatives topics
They won a badge
Join us in greeting them
How do I win badges?