Priupitao sam statisticko pogladjalo #2 (aka. DeepSeek) zasto su performanse FAT32 volume vece nego NTFS u RAMDisku i... pa mogu reci da mi je dao OK rezultate, na tragu onoga sto sam i sam zakljucio...
Kada su stvari toliko brze kao u RAMu, onda svaki overhead igra ulogu i vidljiv je...
Your observation that FAT32 performs faster than NTFS on a RAMDisk in ATTO Disk Benchmark (or similar tools) can be explained by several technical factors. Here’s why:
1. Overhead of NTFS Features
- NTFS includes advanced features that add overhead, which isn’t beneficial (and can even slow things down) in a RAMDisk environment:
- Journaling (for crash recovery) → Writes extra metadata.
- File permissions (ACLs) → Unnecessary for a RAMDisk.
- MFT (Master File Table) updates → More complex than FAT32’s simple allocation table.
- Small file handling → While NTFS is better for small files on HDDs/SSDs, RAM is so fast that the overhead of NTFS’s metadata management can actually slow it down.
FAT32, being much simpler, has:
- No journaling.
- No file permissions.
- A straightforward File Allocation Table (FAT) structure.
→ Less CPU overhead = faster in RAM.
2. Benchmark Workload Matters
ATTO Disk Benchmark typically tests sequential read/write speeds with different block sizes. In this case:
- For large sequential transfers, both NTFS and FAT32 should be close to RAM’s raw speed (~10+ GB/s).
- For small block sizes (4KB–64KB), FAT32 often wins because:
- NTFS has to update more metadata (MFT, journals, etc.).
- FAT32’s simple structure allows near-direct writes.
3. RAMDisk Optimizations
- NTFS is optimized for disks (HDD/SSD), not RAM.
- FAT32’s simplicity aligns better with RAM’s speed because:
- No need for fragmentation management (RAM is inherently fast at random access).
- No need for advanced caching (RAM is already cache).
4. File System Drivers & Caching
- The NTFS driver in Windows is more complex and may introduce tiny delays.
- The FAT32 driver is lightweight and well-optimized for simple operations.
- Windows caching mechanisms may behave differently between the two.
When Would NTFS Be Faster on RAMDisk?
- If you’re working with many tiny files, NTFS’s MFT might help (but often, FAT32 still wins).
- If the workload involves heavy metadata operations (though RAM is so fast that the difference is minimal).
Pa eto, rezultati ne lazu, svi testovi koje sam radio su radjeni na isti nacin, sa istim volume sizeom, samo sam mijenjao filesystem...
Jedino, ne kuzim ovo za FAT32 vs NTFS performanse jer mi i DeepSeek veli da je NTFS brzi... Valjda desetljecima zivim u uvjerenju da je FAT32 brzi bas zbog minimalnog overheada i jednostavnosti samog FSa... Tako da, sljedeci projekt ce biti da istestiram FAT32 vs NTFS na nekom NVME disku i SSDu pa da vidim sta je sa time... Budem si samo pronasao neki laptop na kojem cu to moci bez problema odraditi...