Does Your SSD's File System Affect Performance?

CrystalDiskMark: Random And Sequential Throughput

The CrystalDiskMark random 4 KB results confirm what we saw from AS SSD.

Throughput using 512 KB blocks turns out as we'd expect it, with exFAT and NTFS outperforming FAT32, which once again fails to impress.

Sequential transfer performance is comparable on all three file systems.

Create a new thread in the UK Article comments forum about this subject
This thread is closed for comments
5 comments
Comment from the forums
    Your comment
  • jamesedgeuk2000
    Could you not have benchmarked HPS too by doing the tests with a Mac setup to duel boot OSX and Windows 7? (thus letting the 7 install see the HPS file system)
    0
  • djamorpheus
    What about linux filesystems?
    0
  • audiovoodoo
    No mention of cluster size impact on performance?
    0
  • audiovoodoo
    What are you talking about?
    0
  • Anonymous
    Question is does the FAT32 partition was aligned? Data on FAT32 starts straight after two FAT tables (their size depends on amount of clusters). So even if volume for FAT32 partition is aligned after creating such partition the FAT32 clusters may not be aligned to SSD physical sectors.

    http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/151798-does-fat32-align-its-clusters/
    0