Hacking 32GB sd can limit - looking for help in troubleshooting

[j_mcc99]

So I'm happily running emunand (on micro SD) at 9.1.0. My sysnand is still at 1.0.

Unfortunately, I am still unable to use anything larger than a 32GB SDHC memory card. That also includes not being able to use SDXC cards at all.

I had thought I would've received the update to use larger capacity cards when updating my emunand.... but that appears not to be the case.

I'm wondering if it's because my sysnand is still at 1.0? However, if I boot into emunand you'd think that would be moot, right?

Would love some feedback / suggestions / similar experiences. Really hurts being limited to 32GB. Thanks!

 

[JFizDaWiz]

what happens when you use a larger card? are you partitioning it right?

 

[Kafluke]

Did you choose exfat update when updating the emu nand?

 

[Goku1992A]

So I'm happily running emunand (on micro SD) at 9.1.0. My sysnand is still at 1.0.

Unfortunately, I am still unable to use anything larger than a 32GB SDHC memory card. That also includes not being able to use SDXC cards at all.

I had thought I would've received the update to use larger capacity cards when updating my emunand.... but that appears not to be the case.

I'm wondering if it's because my sysnand is still at 1.0? However, if I boot into emunand you'd think that would be moot, right?

Would love some feedback / suggestions / similar experiences. Really hurts being limited to 32GB. Thanks!

Is there a legit reason why your Sysnand is 1.0? You must have downgraded I just cant wrap my head around the benefit

To answer your question yes I think the higher firmware supports higher SD

 

[The Real Jdbye]

So I'm happily running emunand (on micro SD) at 9.1.0. My sysnand is still at 1.0.

Unfortunately, I am still unable to use anything larger than a 32GB SDHC memory card. That also includes not being able to use SDXC cards at all.

I had thought I would've received the update to use larger capacity cards when updating my emunand.... but that appears not to be the case.

I'm wondering if it's because my sysnand is still at 1.0? However, if I boot into emunand you'd think that would be moot, right?

Would love some feedback / suggestions / similar experiences. Really hurts being limited to 32GB. Thanks!

Format the card as FAT32 with guiformat or Minitool Partition Wizard. The alternative is installing the exFAT update, but exFAT is not recommended on the Switch due to being prone to corruption if there are any crashes.

 

[ZachyCatGames]

Is there a legit reason why your Sysnand is 1.0? You must have downgraded I just cant wrap my head around the benefit

To answer your question yes I think the higher firmware supports higher SD

1.0.0s are rare and updating them is a shitty idea as their nands have some neat shit that gets nuked after updating and their ODM4 fuse count of 1 is the second rarest value that ODM4 can be.

 

[Goku1992A]

1.0.0s are rare and updating them is a shitty idea as their nands have some neat shit that gets nuked after updating and their ODM4 fuse count of 1 is the second rarest value that ODM4 can be.

Yes but I'm assuming he downgraded right ? So it's not really rare since his fuse count would be atleast above 1. I guess what I'm saying is what's the true benefit. If it was the first release model brand new in box I understand but considering he had 9.01 on his emunand means that he had to have something between 5 to 8 and then downgraded back to 1.0 .
That's why I'm saying what's truly the benefit.... I'll use my PS vita as an example I was on 3.71 but I couldn't play psp games so I downgraded to 3.60 that was the only way to play psp games through adrenaline.

I just dont know the logic because i was told 2 things #1 you cant play new games on old firmware with the switch and #2 You need to keep on updating your system for it to be ran properly (such as new feature)

I have a pokemon switch lite brand new in the box sealed know 10 years from now its going to be worth triple the value

 

[Hayato213]

Yes but I'm assuming he downgraded right ? So it's not really rare since his fuse count would be atleast above 1. I guess what I'm saying is what's the true benefit. If it was the first release model brand new in box I understand but considering he had 9.01 on his emunand means that he had to have something between 5 to 8 and then downgraded back to 1.0 .
That's why I'm saying what's truly the benefit.... I'll use my PS vita as an example I was on 3.71 but I couldn't play psp games so I downgraded to 3.60 that was the only way to play psp games through adrenaline.

I just dont know the logic because i was told 2 things #1 you cant play new games on old firmware with the switch and #2 You need to keep on updating your system for it to be ran properly (such as new feature)

I have a pokemon switch lite brand new in the box sealed know 10 years from now its going to be worth triple the value

No he got a launched day unit, that he didnt update his firmware probably. He should just use FAT32 anyway as exFAT aren't recommended.

 

[godreborn]

might be like 4.1 (iirc) on the wii. I don't think the system could read sdhc 'til that software version. I'm using a 1TB in my switch, and I've had no issues. I think the largest possible is 2TB. btw, I'm on the latest firmware, no exploits.

 

[Goku1992A]

No he got a launched day unit, that he didnt update his firmware probably. He should just use FAT32 anyway as exFAT aren't recommended.

Gotcha. I never had a problem using exfat and Nintendo used exfat by default for over 32gb if you didnt do anything to the card

 

[Hayato213]

Gotcha. I never had a problem using exfat and Nintendo used exfat by default for over 32gb if you didnt do anything to the card

You should reread your post, since you said you don't do anything to the card, if you use homebrew, like backing up game saves, you write a lot to the card, with exFAT you make the card corruption prone.

 

[Goku1992A]

You should reread your post, since you said you don't do anything to the card, if you use homebrew, like backing up game saves, you write a lot to the card, with exFAT you make the card corruption prone.

That's what I meant on a OFW and CFW point of view I have like 3 big Nintendo Switch and 2 lites I never experienced problems on either fat32 or exfat. The stock switches (if you dont make the card fat32 the exfat would work just fine) I recently went to exfat because it was easier for me to put my games on vs trying to split.

I still think it's extremely impressive that the OP held on to a switch that long on 1.0

 

[Hayato213]

That's what I meant on a OFW and CFW point of view I have like 3 big Nintendo Switch and 2 lites I never experienced problems on either fat32 or exfat. The stock switches (if you dont make the card fat32 the exfat would work just fine) I recently went to exfat because it was easier for me to put my games on vs trying to split.

I still think it's extremely impressive that the OP held on to a switch that long on 1.0

Some people had been able to held their unit to low fuse count due to AutoRCM, if you do it correctly you can always restore original firmware. Soon or later you will experience file corruption if you are running homebrew on an exFAT format card.

 

[ZachyCatGames]

I still think it's extremely impressive that the OP held on to a switch that long on 1.0

I know a few people who still own a unit that’s either on 1.0.0 or has 1.0.0 fuses lol.
It’s not something that’s impossible.

 

[Goku1992A]

Some people had been able to held their unit to low fuse count due to AutoRCM, if you do it correctly you can always restore original firmware. Soon or later you will experience file corruption if you are running homebrew on an exFAT format card.

I'm still learning that part because that is what I have been confused about. I mean the switch sole intention is to update so fuses would get burned regardless (Talking about a regular switch) and I'm assuming the emunand preserved your system nand which you can update without burning fuses with choidujour... (applies to emunand]

I'm also assuming OP doesnt play online since the sysnand is 1.0 but to play online you would always need the latest and greatest firmware regardless so your fuse would need to burn anyway. I'm only confused because when you launch CFW your fuse does not burn I had experimented and confirmed it. 9.0 has 11 fuses burner and 9.1.0 has 12 fuses which is normal. So I didnt know if you could bypass what's meant to happen anyways because Nintendo could say how are you on firmware 12.0 with only 12 fuses burned vs the 15.

That part I'm always confused about because the sysnand purpose was for legit play

 

[Deleted User]

If i may chime in here. I remember at some point there was a way to go from fat32 to exfat with an offline process. The screen looked similar to original hekate if i recall. Also it has been a long time but way i remember it at first we only had fat32 format as option and exfat was added later but even on 1.0 i was pretty sure you could use a larger than 32gb micro sd so this post is puzzling to me. Is this a limitation of running emunand on the original firmware? As for playing online i thought as long as he is careful he could play online with emunand if he really wanted?

now so far there are no benefits to 1.0. Yes it is true he might potentially have more benefits but i forget the cutoff for the cold boot hack but i think it was 4.0? And that is like the only really benefit i see to the lower firmwares personally. And i mean it isn’t a huge benefit in my view.

i think back to when i held on to 3.0 and homebrew started pouring in. In my case i had more than one switch. I bought a second switch to play odyssey. Eventually the homebrew got so good on the switch i updated my 3.0 cause it seemed silly to me. I really feel all these people who held out lost good times in the end. This scene is such a whirlwind. So much updating and configuring. I would have lost out on so much fun stuff like pfba psnes pnes and retroarch (tons im leaving out) if i had just waited on old firmware. While it is true homebrew causes corruption on sd formatted to exfat if just using to play switch games it seems fine. As for what this fellow should do im not sure but i am really scratching my head there...off to google reading here:

https://switch.hacks.guide/

I found this statement:

“If your Switch won’t read your larger than 32GB micro SD card without a System Update, you can use guiformat on Windows to format it as FAT32 with an Allocation Unit Size of 32K (32768).”

I hope this helps you!

 

[j_mcc99]

what happens when you use a larger card? are you partitioning it right?

I have a 128GB Samsung EVO SDXC card. When prepped properly with guiformat my switch shows a boot.dat? screen (SXOS).

I should note that I copied, file for file, from my working micro SDHC card.

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------

Did you choose exfat update when updating the emu nand?

I did select this awhile back, I believe. However, I thought that was only for exFAT compatibility.... not SD"X"C compatibility. Am I wrong on that?

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------

Is there a legit reason why your Sysnand is 1.0? You must have downgraded I just cant wrap my head around the benefit

To answer your question yes I think the higher firmware supports higher SD

I have not downgraded, no. This is a legit 1.0 that I obtained. It's never been online and bricmii reports 1 burnt fuse.

There is no real reason to why I'm still on 1.0 other than there could be advantages to it down the road, as others have mentioned. I'm content to keep it offline atm.

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------

Format the card as FAT32 with guiformat or Minitool Partition Wizard. The alternative is installing the exFAT update, but exFAT is not recommended on the Switch due to being prone to corruption if there are any crashes.

I've tried this many times and always receive SXOS's boot.dat screen. See my previous reply.

 

[designgears]

\

IIRC SDXC support come with 3.x.x, I think. You would need to update your sysnand to get that working properly.

I know a few people who still own a unit that’s either on 1.0.0 or has 1.0.0 fuses lol.
It’s not something that’s impossible.

I haz 3

 

[j_mcc99]

1.0.0s are rare and updating them is a shitty idea as their nands have some neat shit that gets nuked after updating and their ODM4 fuse count of 1 is the second rarest value that ODM4 can be.

This is what I've read too. A curse and a blessing? A curse if I hold out for several years and no benefit materializes. lol

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------

No he got a launched day unit, that he didnt update his firmware probably. He should just use FAT32 anyway as exFAT aren't recommended.

Correct. It is a launch-day unit. Never been online. Fuse count of 1.

 

[ZachyCatGames]

This is what I've read too. A curse and a blessing? A curse if I hold out for several years and no benefit materializes. lol.

It already has some benefits. Like it has the most exploits and gives you the most options. 1.0.0 was built several months before launch and is kinda an interesting piece of the Switch’s history.
If you’re into beta/prototype stuff you can also dump some really old manufacturing/factory firmware stuff off of 1.0.0 units (DM me if you’re interested in that )

Launch units in general also have some benefits like being guaranteed to be unpatched and they have better screens than later units.