Hacking FAT32 vs NTFS vs WBFS

[JoostinOnline]

I can't see why somebody would say that WBFS format is obsolete,

FAT32 is easier to manage and you can still recover your games if a file is corrupt. The reason WBFS is obsolete is because it's been replaced by FAT32. NeoGamma doesn't work with it, but that's really just a disc loader anyway.

 

[Mantis41]

There is only one drawback to using FAT32, which is you can't save single files larger than 4GB to it (with the exception of wii games which can be split). So unless you're using the same HDD to store HD movies or PC game ISOs or something, that will probably never even be an issue for most people. And the nonsense about NTFS being faster than FAT32 is exactly that, nonsense.

“It takes FAT32 a lot longer than NTFS to find a file and more importantly parts of fragmented file than NTFS.”

When I was testing I had the nand, all of the homebrew and the backups on the same FAT32 partition. Homebrew and nand backup/extraction will create a large number of small files all over the drive. This meant the backups would have a high probability of being heavily fragmented which in turn will slow down a large FAT32 partition horribly.

When I switched to NTFS and used two partitions I would have caused two things. The first would have been defragmentation of all the backups as the newly created NTFS partition was moved to the back of the drive. The second would have been defragmentation of the homebrew and nand as the FAT32 partition was resized and placed at the front of the drive.

It may have been the defragmentation more than anything else that gave me the performance boost. Still, it is generally recommended to use NTFS on large drives and FAT32 on small as FAT32 does not handle the fragmentation of very large files all that well.

 

[JoostinOnline]

There is only one drawback to using FAT32, which is you can't save single files larger than 4GB to it (with the exception of wii games which can be split). So unless you're using the same HDD to store HD movies or PC game ISOs or something, that will probably never even be an issue for most people. And the nonsense about NTFS being faster than FAT32 is exactly that, nonsense.

“It takes FAT32 a lot longer than NTFS to find a file and more importantly parts of fragmented file than NTFS.”

When I was testing I had the nand, all of the homebrew and the backups on the same FAT32 partition. Homebrew and nand backup/extraction will create a large number of small files all over the drive. This meant the backups would have a high probability of being heavily fragmented which in turn will slow down a large FAT32 partition horribly.

When I switched to NTFS and used two partitions I would have caused two things. The first would have been defragmentation of all the backups as the newly created NTFS partition was moved to the back of the drive. The second would have been defragmentation of the homebrew and nand as the FAT32 partition was resized and placed at the front of the drive.

It may have been the defragmentation more than anything else that gave me the performance boost. Still, it is generally recommended to use NTFS on large drives and FAT32 on small as FAT32 does not handle the fragmentation of very large files all that well.

You really shouldn't have that much fragmentation though. I guess if you are constantly copying and deleting files that would be the case, but it's not like an internal drive on your computer where you are constantly making changes. I just checked my 1TB HDD that I have never defragmented:

Spoiler

Microsoft Disk Defragmenter
Copyright © 2007 Microsoft Corp.

Invoking analysis on WIIHDD (W...



The operation completed successfully.

Post Defragmentation Report:


Volume Information:
Volume size = 931.38 GB
Cluster size = 64 KB
Used space = 350.49 GB
Free space = 580.88 GB


Fragmentation:
Total fragmented space = 0%
Average fragments per file = 1.01

Movable files and folders = 5620
Unmovable files and folders = 858


Files:
Fragmented files = 11
Total file fragments = 52


Folders:
Total folders = 858
Fragmented folders = 0
Total folder fragments = 0


Free space:
Free space count = 385
Average free space size = 1.50 GB
Largest free space size = 532.81 GB

 

[obcd]

fragmentation only starts to happen when the partition is nearly full. As long as there is free space on the partition, the OS will allocate space for added stuff there and will add the stuff in one unfragmented block of multiple clusters. The reason for this is also to allow to undelete accidently deleted stuff. Since it isn't overwritten, it's still on the disk. Only the reference where to find it in the partition table and file allocation table got altered.
If there is not enough free space anymore at the end of the partition for the newly added stuff, than the system will start to fill up the gaps from previous deleted items, and this will cause defragmentation.

Another way defragmentation can occur is if a file is incrementally created. Every time the file needs a new cluster, it will be allocated after the stuff loaded since the creation of the file. So such a file will be defragmented (by design)

Windows has buildin tools to defragment fat(32) partitions. So, there isn't really a reason to switch to ntfs for that. Besides that, I have never really noticed the always promised speed boost after defragmenting a drive. I assume that due to the drive buildin cache memory, the difference is minimal.

 

[smf]

I can't see why somebody would say that WBFS format is obsolete, it works great and will never be out dated

It's outdated because using FAT32 or NTFS means you don't need to use Wii backup managers & put up with windows asking you if you want to format the drive everytime you plug it in.
Plus you can use it for other files without having multiple partitions.

You don't have to change it, use what you like. However I ditched WBFS as soon as I was able.

WBFS only existed because either:
1. it was an ego trip for waninkoko to create his own filesystem
2. because he couldn't figure out how to get FAT32 to work
3. he wanted to piss people off having to deal with a custom filesystem

None of those is a particularly good reason to use it.

 

[obcd]

In those days, it was probably 2. We now have a library that does the hard work for us.

At the beginning, I can imagine that porting that lib for the wii wasn't an easy job.
We have seen the same for ntfs support. In the beginning, only reading from ntfs was possible.
Now, it has become mature as well.
It wouldn't suprise me that you need to pay royalties to M$ if you want to use ntfs in an official product.
You see more and more devices that can use fat partitions, but I haven't seen ntfs compitble ones yet.

If you are using wbfs, and everything is working fine for you, leave it like that. Since you are not a pirate and only have your 20 games on your harddisk, it's not really a problem if the partition becomes corrupt so that you have to rip all your games again.
If you buy a harddisk specific for wii use, use fat32 with a 32KB cluster size. It has the best compatibility.
If you want to test a drive for compatibility, and it happens to be ntfs formatted, leave it like that. Understand that some homebrew won't be able to acces it.

 

[ToddofWar420]

I got my Hdd set up as NTFS as primary (924GB) and FAT32 (8GB) as secondary. Does anyone happen to know if it matters on the drive where NTFS/FAT32 has to be say for an example can I get my homebrew to work FAT32 if its in second place or does it have to be in first. Also, I'm using WiiFlow too. Anything will help. Thanks.

 

[JoostinOnline]

I got my Hdd set up as NTFS as primary (924GB) and FAT32 (8GB) as secondary. Does anyone happen to know if it matters on the drive where NTFS/FAT32 has to be say for an example can I get my homebrew to work FAT32 if its in second place or does it have to be in first. Also, I'm using WiiFlow too. Anything will help. Thanks.

Some homebrew (such as UNEEK) requires that the FAT32 partition be first.

 

[PsyBlade]

Some homebrew (such as UNEEK) requires that the FAT32 partition be first.

HBC too afaik

 

[JoostinOnline]

Some homebrew (such as UNEEK) requires that the FAT32 partition be first.

HBC too afaik

It will work, although it seems less likely to detect it..

 

[ToddofWar420]

Thanks guys. So If I place Fat32 first, WiiFlow will still pick up my Wii games without any problems? I ask this cuz I got everything ready but just need to know what order to do what before I place my games back on the drive.

 

[JoostinOnline]

Thanks guys. So If I place Fat32 first, WiiFlow will still pick up my Wii games without any problems? I ask this cuz I got everything ready but just need to know what order to do what before I place my games back on the drive.

Yes, although it would be better for everything if you just make the whole drive FAT32. Keep in mind that, if you want to use UNEEK, you will need to use 32KB cluster size.

 

[ToddofWar420]

My previous drive is FAT32, but I seem to be having more problems with it since I converted it from WBFS. Like everytime I loaded up WiiFlow it wouldn't pick up then I had to reset it so WiiFlow would pick up on it. Its been a little annoying so I just wanted to try out NTFS.

 

[the_randomizer]

I've been using a wbfs formatted hdd since waninkoko's first usbloader release. Never quite needed to change it to fat32 or ntfs since the drive is full and will only be used for Wii games, it just doesn't make sense for me to change the format. I can't see why somebody would say that WBFS format is obsolete, it works great and will never be outdated, the usbloader will always support WBFS fromatted usb HDDs, not to mention Neogamma will only read a WBFS partition from a SD card to load Wii games. But, if I upgrade to a new usb hdd, then FAT32 is what I will use.

Good luck recovering the data if/when your HDD fails. WBFS is not a format that can be used by PCs and is more susceptible to fragmentation. It's good for Wii backups, but anything else like emulators and media players, it's absolutely useless. And why would people want load games from an SD card? Their read/write speeds are a lot slower than USB2.0 hard drives. They're a lot cheaper per GB than SD/SDHC cards will ever be.

 

[ToddofWar420]

I got my 1TB Hdd set up finally!! With a FAT32/NTFS. I got the FAT32 for my Emulated Nand so I can use Triiforce for WiiWare and to be able to save my Wii game saves to the Hdd without beating up my Wii's memory, I also got NTFS for just the Wii games. Everything runs smoothly without any hassles.

 

[ToddofWar420]

Would anybody happen to know how to import Wii games saves from the Wii memory onto Nand emu on USB?

 

[JoostinOnline]

Would anybody happen to know how to import Wii games saves from the Wii memory onto Nand emu on USB?

One way is is to extract your NAND backup using ShowMiiWads, switch to ShowMiiNAND, right click on one of the titles, and choose "Savedata>Backup All". Change your NAND directory to the emunand and do the same thing, but click Restore All.

 

[Mantis41]

Full boot mii nand dump followed by an extract using

Would anybody happen to know how to import Wii games saves from the Wii memory onto Nand emu on USB?

I just did a full nand dump with bootmii then extracted that with SFSD. The results will end up in the root of the partiton. I then copied all of the extracted folders to \nand\. This gave me all saves and channels in the emulated nand.

 

[ToddofWar420]

Thanks guys. You've been some big time help for me. I will try this method out and see what I can do for my WiiFlow. Luckly I found out you don't have to do all this with USB Loader GX.

 

[ToddofWar420]

I just noticed that WiiFlow doesn't show more then 120 games. I have tried different versions and mods to try to fix this problem I have. USB Loader GX seems to pick up all the games I have tho. Does anybody else have this problem with there WiiFlow??