optimize sdhc for performance?

Running xp sp3 and have a 16gb sdhc card formatted to ntfs that I'm using. When I go into "policy" for the drive and change "optimize for quick removal" to "optimize for performance" it does it and says I have to reboot for it to take effect but... when I reboot and check it's always set back to "optimize for quick removal". Anybody else notice that or can confirm that they have a similar setup with their card set to "optimize for performance" and it's working? Thanks for any info...

 

That only works on fixed drives. Windows will still default to "quick removal" upon reboot. Consequently, NTFS is slower on SDHC, so you would have better speed using fat32.

 

Optimize for performance only works for fixed drives? Is that an Acer thing 'cause I'm pretty sure I've done it before on other machines (set thumb drives to optimize for performance). I could be wrong but I thought I did... kinda the main reason I bought the big card was for watching DVD movies from it so some .iso's may be bigger than 4GB so have to use ntfs. Damn...

 

can u tell me wish card u got because im going to get one for the samereason as u , to put my movies in there i dont want to fill my hard drive with all my best movies

 

Mine does the same thing in Vista.

 

I would recommend you use the exFAT filesystem (aka FAT64) from Vista instead of trying to deal with the overhead of NTFS. You'll get past the file size restrictions and still have the speed of FAT. It's very simple to add to XP.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exfathttp://blog.tiensivu.com/aaron/arch...driver-from-Vista-runs-under-XP-and-2003.html

I've seen the files floating around on the torrents if you don't have vista handy. Good luck!

EDIT: forgot to mention, i haven't seen a format utility for XP yet so you'll need to format the card on vista.

 

Did anyone find a solution for this problem? I have a USB memory stick which I can successfully set yo 'optimize for performance', but the sdhc just refuses. Is this likely to be a problem with my card? The reader driver? Tried reinstalling XP 3 times which didn't help. Any suggestions gladly received!

 

Did you try exFAT? It's been officially released for XP now.

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/955704

 

NTFS is suppose to be faster than Fat32 on larger volume..eg.. 16GB.

 

Every SD and SDHC card I have ever owned is formatted FAT32 from the factory.

 

But not on flash media, it's much slower.

 

With the exception of all of my flash media. My usb flashdrive formatted with ntfs gets about 25Mbit/s read with NTFS and around 22MB/s with Fat32. Samething happends with my 4gig SD card.

 

Weird, i see much different behavior on my cards. Are you transferring large files or many small ones? NTFS is pretty fast for large files in my experience but very slow for folders with many small files. Just for a test, try copying the contents of this: http://ftp.drupal.org/files/projects/drupal-6.11.tar.gz.

ExFAT should be faster than NTFS or FAT32, but lacks the extra features of NTFS of course.

 

I tested the speed with windows 7 .iso image and installation file. Copying the 2.5GB ISO file takes less time to NTFS than Fat32. Installing Windows 7 is faster from NTFS than Fat32.

I don't use ExFat because it's not compatible with my digital camera or the computers at school.

 

Is this using the Acer Aspire One A110? NTFS crawls on the slow SSD of the A110. The HD version AAO does not have this problem and NTFS is fine.

 

OK, but a 2.5 GB ISO is pretty much the opposite of what i just mentioned. I said I found that NTFS was much slower on folders with large numbers of small files, and provided a link of something to test.

I haven't installed Win7, but installing XP from NTFS is definitely faster, as you noted. The textmode portion in the beginning is very fast.