How to format my passport ultra to exfat
![how to format my passport ultra to exfat how to format my passport ultra to exfat](https://www.seagate.com/files/www-content/support-content/knowledge-base/images/BigSurShowAllDevices.jpg)
- #HOW TO FORMAT MY PASSPORT ULTRA TO EXFAT PORTABLE#
- #HOW TO FORMAT MY PASSPORT ULTRA TO EXFAT WINDOWS 7#
- #HOW TO FORMAT MY PASSPORT ULTRA TO EXFAT FREE#
“I have a WD Passport 500GB portable external hard drive that has been formatted with Ext2 and it works well.
#HOW TO FORMAT MY PASSPORT ULTRA TO EXFAT WINDOWS 7#
Hope it helps.Unable to open WD Passport drive in Windows 7 You can always make another partition with a different file system even if it's on the same physical drive. Otherwise, I don't recommend using FAT (unless the device's capacity is 4Gig or less) - use NTFS at least for Windows. FAT is about as universally accepted as it gets. (I assume we're talking about huge multimedia files which is why I bring up "transcoding" since I seem to always find ways to make files smaller when I transcode, especially if they were recorded using MCE.)Ībout the only reason I can see for using FAT (vFAT, FAT32, FAT16, etc.) is so that other operating systems can read/write files on the storage device. That way, if you end up with files larger than 4Gig you will still be able to store your monster files at least until you can break them up or transcode them into something smaller. Therefore, I would recommend using the NTFS file system with the recommended allocation unit size (I believe that's 4K). And if you ever end up with files larger than 4Gig you may end up cursing any FAT type system you may be using. Problem there is Microsoft OS's (Windows, really) don't work too well with anything other than FAT (vFAT, FAT32, etc.) or NTFS. So if wasted space bugs you then maybe you might want to think about using a different file system.
#HOW TO FORMAT MY PASSPORT ULTRA TO EXFAT FREE#
Also you can compute the free space utilization according to your file sizes.īasically, the larger the files you intend on keeping the larger each allocation unit size you may want in use - but not too big or too small! I think DragonLord explained it pretty well. Which AUS you should use? This depends on how much your average file size is. So, what is the conclusion here? If you will store large (I mean large!) files on the disk, a higher AUS will give an appreciable read performance boost while reducing the file count and free space Think using large AUS in reverse, same category problems and improvements, but in reverse. Using small AUS improves the free space utilization but reduces the disk read performance. need to make only a couple of disk reads to completely read a GB sized file! But here's the trade-off: using a large AUS significantly improves the disk reading performance. And as a side effect, the number of files to store on the disk is reduced due to same problem: the last AU not being used fully. That being said, using a large AUS significantly reduces the free space utilization due to not using the last allocation unit completely. The operating system reads only the allocation unit size worth of data at a low level disk read operation. You can observe this behaviour on the file properties dialog on Windows what your file size is and how much space this file actually covers on the disk are two different concepts. 384KB will be allocated in 3 units, the remaining 116KB will be allocated in a final unit, and 12KB of that unit will be empty. If your file's size is 500KB and you have 128KB AUS, your file will still be saved in 4 units on the disk because as mentioned above 128KB is the smallest size of an allocation unit. For example, if you have a file sized 512KB and you have 128KB allocation unit size, your file will be saved in 4 units in the disk ( 512KB/128KB). Your actual data will be separated into units of that size while saving to the disk. It is the smallest data block on the disk.