Hacking best way to format a 1.5tb

[W.I.C.K.E.D.]

I'm using cfg loader and I wanted to know what would be the best way to format it? I have wbfs files only and some are split. I would like to put some movies I recently purchased on there too possibly, but games are actually more important to me right now. Thanks in advance.


Edit: Currently on my 5oogb drive I have been using fat32, but I wasn't sure if formatting a larger drive to that would create some issues or become unstable.

 

[Jugarina]

I formated a 1tb in fat32 so I don't think the extra 500 gigs would cause any problems. I format all my externals in fat32 so I can use them on my game systems and play convert blu-rays, (for data size reasons) on my tv that has a usb port. Only thing that sucks is the 4 gig file size limitation. These devices would not except NTSC.

 

[W.I.C.K.E.D.]

ok, in that case, 32 or 64 cluster?

 

[Jugarina]

I always go with 32 clusters on mine and have had no issues.

 

[JoostinOnline]

It's up to you. 32kb is slower, but files will take up less space than 64kb.

 

[Jugarina]

I think I would go with slightly slower over double the space.

 

[JoostinOnline]

I think I would go with slightly slower over double the space.

Lol, you don't get double the space. Think of it like this. Each file on your HDD will take up to 32KB more if you have 64KB clusters. Unless you have tons of tiny files, it really won't make that much of a difference.

 

[Jugarina]

Thanks for clearing that up. How tiny are we talking? Do you mean only files that are less the 32kb in size? I have alot of small files for .srt captions for movies, (around 500) but I don't believe they are under 32kb more like 1-4 megs in size. Would that make any difference at single digit meg range?

 

[JoostinOnline]

Thanks for clearing that up. How tiny are we talking? Do you mean only files that are less the 32kb in size? I have alot of small files for .srt captions for movies, (around 500) but I don't believe they are under 32kb more like 1-4 megs in size. Would that make any difference at single digit meg range?

A file takes up X amount of clusters, where X can only be a whole number. If they are multiples of 64kb, it will take up that exact amount of space. Say you have a file that is 65KB though. If your drive was formatted with 32KB clusters, you would end up using 96KB (32 * 3), so you would waste 31KB (96 - 65). If your drive was formatted with 64KB clusters, you would use 128KB (64 * 2), a loss of 63KB.

The more files you have, the more space you will waste. If you have tens of thousands of files then the space might matter, but most likely you will have a few hundred files so you won't even notice the difference.

 

[Jugarina]

Basically your saying that for the average user these cluster size choices offered are irelivent.

Very nice explaination.

 

[Lucif3r]

Basically your saying that for the average user these cluster size choices offered are irelivent.

Yeah. But as Joostin said 32kb is a bit slower than 64 because the hdd needs to search through more clusters. But in 99.999..% of the cases its nothing you will ever notice.

 

[Foxi4]

In my opinion, with which most people will disagree, use NTFS on the whole thing, alternatively 1Tb for backups in NTFS and the rest in FAT32 for homebrew, but in my opinion homebrew can easily fit on the SD card. Seriously, screw disc splitting of games that are larger then 4Gb, even if there isn't a whole lot of them. The only real advantage FAT32 has in my opinion is the capacity to boot homebrew from it.

 

[JoostinOnline]

In my opinion, with which most people will disagree, use NTFS on the whole thing, alternatively 1Tb for backups in NTFS and the rest in FAT32 for homebrew, but in my opinion homebrew can easily fit on the SD card. Seriously, screw disc splitting of games that are larger then 4Gb, even if there isn't a whole lot of them. The only real advantage FAT32 has in my opinion is the capacity to boot homebrew from it.

So FAT32 does more stuff with no downsides, but you think NTFS is better? Lol.

 

[Foxi4]

In my opinion, with which most people will disagree, use NTFS on the whole thing, alternatively 1Tb for backups in NTFS and the rest in FAT32 for homebrew, but in my opinion homebrew can easily fit on the SD card. Seriously, screw disc splitting of games that are larger then 4Gb, even if there isn't a whole lot of them. The only real advantage FAT32 has in my opinion is the capacity to boot homebrew from it.

So FAT32 does more stuff with no downsides, but you think NTFS is better? Lol.

Having to split discs is a downside to me, and a massive one considering the fact that Homebrew isn't massive in size and does not require such a large partition anyways just for that purpose, not to mention that as far as I know, SD access is quicker then HDD access. Not a lol matter, just my opinion.

 

[JoostinOnline]

In my opinion, with which most people will disagree, use NTFS on the whole thing, alternatively 1Tb for backups in NTFS and the rest in FAT32 for homebrew, but in my opinion homebrew can easily fit on the SD card. Seriously, screw disc splitting of games that are larger then 4Gb, even if there isn't a whole lot of them. The only real advantage FAT32 has in my opinion is the capacity to boot homebrew from it.

So FAT32 does more stuff with no downsides, but you think NTFS is better? Lol.

Having to split discs is a downside to me, and a massive one considering the fact that Homebrew isn't massive in size and does not require such a large partition anyways just for that purpose, not to mention that as far as I know, SD access is quicker then HDD access. Not a lol matter, just my opinion.

Why is it a downside? There is no loss in performance or anything. Besides, there are almost no games that are over 4GB anyway. FAT32 is also more stable than NTFS on the Wii.

 

[Foxi4]

In my opinion, with which most people will disagree, use NTFS on the whole thing, alternatively 1Tb for backups in NTFS and the rest in FAT32 for homebrew, but in my opinion homebrew can easily fit on the SD card. Seriously, screw disc splitting of games that are larger then 4Gb, even if there isn't a whole lot of them. The only real advantage FAT32 has in my opinion is the capacity to boot homebrew from it.

So FAT32 does more stuff with no downsides, but you think NTFS is better? Lol.

Having to split discs is a downside to me, and a massive one considering the fact that Homebrew isn't massive in size and does not require such a large partition anyways just for that purpose, not to mention that as far as I know, SD access is quicker then HDD access. Not a lol matter, just my opinion.

Why is it a downside? There is no loss in performance or anything. Besides, there are almost no games that are over 4GB anyway. FAT32 is also more stable than NTFS on the Wii.

Perhaps I'm bias because I never had any issues with my NTFS drive whatsoever, and putting Smash Bros. and Metroid Prime Trilogy without splitting was the best argument NTFS could provide in its favour at the time. As I said, this is just my opinion. We should present both options and their up-sides .

 

[PsyBlade]

2 partitions
small fat32 for homebrew + large ntfs/ext4 for data
even if you make the hombrew one 32g (gigantic for its purpose) thats only 2%

 

[JoostinOnline]

In my opinion, with which most people will disagree, use NTFS on the whole thing, alternatively 1Tb for backups in NTFS and the rest in FAT32 for homebrew, but in my opinion homebrew can easily fit on the SD card. Seriously, screw disc splitting of games that are larger then 4Gb, even if there isn't a whole lot of them. The only real advantage FAT32 has in my opinion is the capacity to boot homebrew from it.

So FAT32 does more stuff with no downsides, but you think NTFS is better? Lol.

Having to split discs is a downside to me, and a massive one considering the fact that Homebrew isn't massive in size and does not require such a large partition anyways just for that purpose, not to mention that as far as I know, SD access is quicker then HDD access. Not a lol matter, just my opinion.

Why is it a downside? There is no loss in performance or anything. Besides, there are almost no games that are over 4GB anyway. FAT32 is also more stable than NTFS on the Wii.

Perhaps I'm bias because I never had any issues with my NTFS drive whatsoever, and putting Smash Bros. and Metroid Prime Trilogy without splitting was the best argument NTFS could provide in its favour at the time. As I said, this is just my opinion. We should present both options and their up-sides .

I still don't understand why you consider splitting files a downside. It doesn't make any difference.

 

[jamespoo]

i have 80hdd i use and its fat 32 but all the wii game iso cant copy to it because file size is too big

 

[Lucif3r]

i have 80hdd i use and its fat 32 but all the wii game iso cant copy to it because file size is too big

Thats because youre not using Wii backup manager.