NTFS and FAT comparison
Windows Bootup Process Multiple Boot Encrypting File System
NTFS vs FAT File System        

NTFS or FAT

You will almost always get the same answer: Go for NTFS! It has better security! Better this! Better that!

Folks, I’m here to tell you that that isn’t always the case, nothing is that clear cut (Life is never clear cut, rule no.1) and that the best solution is to have both file systems.

 

Well, Which One Should I Choose?

I can’t choose for you. I don’t know your situation, nor know your needs, you environment and so on. The choice to go for either FAT or NTFS will entirely hinge on how you will use your hard disk. The easiest way to do that is to list the features of both file systems.

 

Comparison between NTFS and FAT

NTFS
FAT 16/32
  • Default File system In Windows XP, 2k and NT
  • Support For Drives over 40gb, Files over GB
  • Allows extended file names, foreign characters
  • Has a severely crippled maintenance system in chkdsk
  • Chkdsk is notoriously slow
  • Increased security with file encryption
  • Smaller file clusters, 4kb
  • Compression to reduce disk space
  • User permissions for files and folders
  • File copies are “undone” if interrupted, cluster chains is cleaned
  • Small files are kept in Master File Table at the beginning of the drive
  • Not compatible with different operating systems on the same computer
  • Fat 16 not compatible with XP, FAT is more compatible with other operating Systems( Windows 95, etc)
  • FAT 16 has 8.3 character limitation
  • Has better, more and interactive recovery utilities (scandisk)
  • Scandisk is very quick
  • Just a space for the OS to read files
  • Faster on drives less than 10gb
  • FAT 16 cluster size is 32kb
  • Cluster chains containing data from interrupted copies are marked as damaged
  • Master File Table are separate from files

 

Some Random Facts

  • Fat 16 was developed in 1981 for dos
  • Fat 16 was designed to handle floppies
  • Fat 32 is an extension of Fat 16
  • Fat 32 introduced in service pack 2 of Windows 95
  • Operating systems may recognise Fat16, but not Fat 32 (Win NT)
  • You can go from FAT to NTFS but not the other way around
  • FAT = File Allocation Table
  • NTFS = New Technology File System

  Back to Top

Well, Which One Should I Choose?

If you really only want to choose one way or another, here are two very important considerations:

  • For files above 4gb, and hard disks above 32gb, go for NTFS
  • For smaller drives, files and better recovery tools go for FAT
  • But why not go for both, which is the best option in my opinion.
  • Set aside some FAT so that you can run recovery tools, especially scandisk, so that you have something usable when things go awry, instead of the awful Windows System Tools.
  • Then set the rest to NTFS so that you have better security on personal files, support for large files and drive.

 

More Detailed Comparison

Criteria

NTFS5

NTFS

FAT32

FAT16

Operating System

Windows 2000
Windows XP

Windows NT
Windows 2000
Windows XP

Windows 98
Windows ME
Windows 2000
Windows XP

DOS
All versions of
Microsoft Windows

 

Limitations

Max Volume Size

2TB

2TB

2TB

2GB

Max Files on Volume

Nearly Unlimited

Nearly Unlimited

Nearly Unlimited

~65000

Max File Size

Limit Only by
Volume Size

Limit Only by
Volume Size

4GB

2GB

Max Clusters Number

Nearly Unlimited

Nearly Unlimited

268435456

65535

Max File Name Length

Up to 255

Up to 255

Up to 255

Standard - 8.3
Extended - up to 255

 

File System Features

Unicode File Names

Unicode Character Set

Unicode Character Set

System Character Set

System Character Set

System Records Mirror

MFT Mirror File

MFT Mirror File

Second Copy of  FAT

Second Copy of  FAT

Boot Sector Location

First and Last Sectors

First and Last Sectors

First Sector

First Sector

File Attributes

Standard and Custom

Standard and Custom

Standard Set

Standard Set

Alternate Streams

Yes

Yes

No

No

Compression

Yes

Yes

No

No

Encryption

Yes

No

No

No

Object Permissions

Yes

Yes

No

No

Disk Quotas

Yes

No

No

No

Sparse Files

Yes

No

No

No

Reparse Points

Yes

No

No

No

Volume Mount Points

Yes

No

No

No

 

Overall Performance

Built-In Security

Yes

Yes

No

No

Recoverability

Yes

Yes

No

No

Performance

Low on small volumes
High on Large

Low on small volumes 
High on Large

High on small volumes
Low on large

Highest on small volumes
Low on large

Disk Space Economy

Max

Max

Average

Minimal on large volumes

Fault Tolerance

Max

Max

Minimal

Average

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Article reprinted with permission of www.NTFS.com

 

 Back to Top