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

j_mcc99

Active Member
OP
Newcomer
Joined
Jul 25, 2006
Messages
42
Trophies
0
XP
237
Country
Canada
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!
Thanks for the info.

Unfortunately it's true, the Switch originally could not utilize SDXC cards, which are higher capacity (64GB+). It was only compatible with SDHC cards (32GB max).

I did find a thread discussing "the update" which allowed for SDXC use: https://gbatemp.net/threads/switch-update-for-sdxc-exfat.498191/

My ultimate desire would be to safely install this SD update whilst preserving my 1.0.0 fw and 1-fuse count... however I have not read anything yet on how that could be accomplished.

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

View attachment 192545\

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



I haz 3
I feel like I already know the answer to this question but is it possible to preserve fuse-count when updating sysnand? Or only emunand? Thanks for the reply. :)
 
D

Deleted User

Guest
Thanks for the info.

Unfortunately it's true, the Switch originally could not utilize SDXC cards, which are higher capacity (64GB+). It was only compatible with SDHC cards (32GB max).

I did find a thread discussing "the update" which allowed for SDXC use: https://gbatemp.net/threads/switch-update-for-sdxc-exfat.498191/

My ultimate desire would be to safely install this SD update whilst preserving my 1.0.0 fw and 1-fuse count... however I have not read anything yet on how that could be accomplished.

you sure you read the link and tried what i posted? I personally can't remember too well how big of sd i had on 1.0 seemed like right away we had another update but in that link they talk about 1.0-to 3.0 switch and your problem. What would it hurt to try? Personally I could not find anything specifically saying you had to use 32gb or less. What i actually recall was using a 128gb at first and I could have sworn i had it with 1.0. working fine. Yes there was a later update for exfat. That was important cause at first there was no way to split and sx os had no usb loading. Give it a try! who knows I might just be right. Wouldn't that be neat?

Basically what I am telling you is that unless formatted a certain way the 1.0 won't see larger than 32gb and can't format it but follow those instructions and I think you will be ok!

also read the thread you linked sj33 is saying same as me

"Are you saying that SDXC cards require a newer system update? I've used a 128GB SDXC since launch"
 
Last edited by ,

The Real Jdbye

*is birb*
Member
Joined
Mar 17, 2010
Messages
23,355
Trophies
4
Location
Space
XP
13,944
Country
Norway
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 ---------------------------


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 ---------------------------


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 ---------------------------


I've tried this many times and always receive SXOS's boot.dat screen. See my previous reply.
Effectively, exFAT support is SDXC support. There is no physical difference between SDHC and SDXC, the only difference is how they are formatted out of the box, and what requirements are set by the SD Association for being allowed to put the SDXC compatible logo on a product. Namely, they require the product to be exFAT compatible if you want to use the logo. Understandably so, as people would be pretty mad to find out that they can't put a full HD movie or whatever on their new tablet or smartphone because they have to use FAT32 and the file is too big to fit, or they can't record longer than 15 minute clips on their camera/smartphone because the manufacturer did not bother to implement exFAT support and it's not like that feature is the sort of thing that would be advertised or that most people would even know what it means, so you'd never know if what you were getting would work with it, unless you already knew to look for that and had the foresight to do research beforehand (which many sadly don't)

I'm not sure why SX OS can't find boot.dat, but I can think of a couple of possible causes, either there is a bug in SX OS, it's user error, or you have a bad or fake card.
If indeed you copied over every file from the old card as is, then we can rule out user error.

I don't remember seeing anyone else with this issue, so the most likely reason is a bad SD card. Which leads me to my question, where did you buy the card (if Amazon then was it from a 3rd party?)

Fake SD cards are all over, and what they do is fake a higher capacity than is really on the card, and when you try to write data past the actual capacity, either the newly copied data becomes corrupted (most common) or previously written data becomes overwritten with the new data, corrupting older files (less common)

Sometimes the capacity is legitimate from a legitimate factory, but the card failed quality control and instead of being thrown away, some unscrupulous employees ship it anyway and take the money.

Sometimes you just have really bad luck and a product is DOA, it's rare but it can happen with any electronic device.

eBay and any website based in Asia are especially notorious for selling fake cards, but 3rd party Amazon and Newegg sellers also do this. Often the packaging or product itself does not look quite right when compared to a genuine product, but some fakes are quite well made on the outside.
Even if you buy memory cards "Sold and shipped by Amazon", that's not a guarantee either, because as someone recently pointed out to me, Amazon lets 3rd party sellers store stock in their warehouse, and Amazon does not keep this stock separate from their own. If a 3rd party seller sells the same product as Amazon themselves, all of the stock of that product gets lumped into one.

Regardless of where you bought it, the first thing you should try is formatting the card and putting only the SX OS boot.dat on. If that works, you know it's most likely a fake card. If it doesn't, it could still be bad (failed QC) or DOA.

The next thing you should do is run a scan with h2testw, this will take a while so be prepared to leave it overnight if you start in the evening: https://3ds.hacks.guide/h2testw-(windows).html

If h2testw says the card is good, that leaves the last possibility, that this is a bug in SX OS itself, at that point I don't have any suggestions other than to switch to Atmosphere. SX OS has a history of being riddled with bugs,
TX do not do a thorough job of testing each new release, and every time they add a new feature, it seems to introduce new bugs.
Atmosphere is not without its bugs either, but they are usually quicker at fixing them than TX, so that when a new version of Atmosphere releases (which usually come with a warning that there may be bugs), you simply have to hold off for a couple of days, and if there are no reported bugs, the release will be OK'd and no longer considered as a beta. If there are bugs, they will post a status update describing the bugs, so you can choose if you want to update anyway ignoring the bugs, or give it a couple more days which is usually enough for any major bugs to be fixed.
TX can take weeks to fix bugs, and they don't post any status updates, they just post a new release once the bug is fixed. For example, in one of the recent updates, they had fixed an issue with Stealth Mode where it wasn't blocking Nintendo servers properly. This could in the worst case result in people getting flagged for a ban, and since they didn't inform people, instead choosing to fix it and mention it in the changelog, people didn't get any warning that they should turn off wifi, it might already be too late for many users by the time they released the fix. That is a pretty major bug and in my opinion one they should have informed everyone about right away.
People are free to use what they like, but I personally recommend everyone switch to Atmosphere instead, to avoid bugs like this, and not be dependant on a company that will only continue providing updates as long as they're making considerably more money than the hours and trouble they are putting in are worth.
View attachment 192545\

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



I haz 3
SDXC support was introduced along with the 3.0.0 firmware, but has always been a separate download, it's not included with any firmware because Nintendo has to pay licensing for each Switch that installs it, and even though it's included on every game cartridge, the system won't install it unless you've gone online to receive the exFAT update already (or done so through unofficial means)
 
Last edited by The Real Jdbye,
D

Deleted User

Guest
pretty much my point the actual memory components like the bare metal is the same it is the formatting that is causing the issue so as long as he manually formats it as the article explains it should work fine as a fat32 sd larger than 32gb. I also recall there being a way where he could do the exfat format manually. Personally since switch homebrew is awesome I would just use fat32 formatter and call it a day but to each his own lol
 

Site & Scene News

Popular threads in this forum

General chit-chat
Help Users
  • No one is chatting at the moment.
    Veho @ Veho: Looks like Link's Awakening was metaphorical.