Hardware FAT32 Vs ExFAT?

He's trolling, Fat32 is recommended to avoid corruption issues if you're going to use Retroarch and other homebrew exFat could corrupt your entire sd card at any time. You already have an external hard drive to install games larger than 4 gb there's absolutely no reason to use exFat.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Burntzebra23
Every thread like this has one of those "I've had it from the start no problems" yet there's countless other threads about exFat corrupting people's sd cards, and even the Retroarch devs recommend Fat32 only. If you're only using NSPs and XCIs sure you can use exFat, but if you're using Retroarch you're just begging to have your sd card corrupted.

Fat32 solved the issue of the 4gb limit problem a year ago with usb installs.
 
Last edited by EmulateLife,
  • Like
Reactions: Ninse
He's trolling, Fat32 is recommended to avoid corruption issues if you're going to use Retroarch and other homebrew exFat could corrupt your entire sd card at any time. You already have an external hard drive to install games larger than 4 gb there's absolutely no reason to use exFat.
So I change just the format on my so card ?
 
Google GUIFormat and format the card with it, Windows can't format it to Fat32 if it's over 32 gb.

And yes only your sd card the external hard drive stays exFat.
 
Last edited by EmulateLife,
exFAT user here. I have been using it for awhile without any issues. I only run NSP & XCI files (both installed and mounted XCI) and along with SX Installer. I do not use Retroarch nor other homebrew apps. Hope this helps :)
 
Fat32 is more stable. It's not like you'll ever need to handle files bigger than 4GB if you install NSPs via USB.
 

Site & Scene News

Popular threads in this forum