Just formatted my 64gb mic-sd because i kept getting messages on the dispay. After formatting it and per the introductions, on fat32 on 64kb, only 32kb remains? Can anyone help get it back please?
jonas000 said:
Just formatted my 64gb mic-sd because i kept getting messages on the dispay. After formatting it and per the introductions, on fat32 on 64kb, only 32kb remains? Can anyone help get it back please?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Format via windows PC .
That fails its probably a dodgy card .
jje
JJEgan said:
Format via windows PC .
That fails its probably a dodgy card .
jje
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
thats what it did to get this problem. works fine with the 32gb but wandering if there was any where to get it back?
jonas000 said:
thats what it did to get this problem. works fine with the 32gb but wandering if there was any where to get it back?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The clue is in the title. Fat32
Format it in the phone. Probably wipe out the 32GB partition in windows disk management first
The failure was in using Microsoft die formatting sd-cards. If you want to format sdxc cards in fat32, you need something like this:
http://panasonic.jp/support/global/cs/sd/download/index.html
Hth
Cheers
jknarf
Sent from my HTC Incredible S using xda app-developers app
jknarf said:
The failure was in using Microsoft die formatting sd-cards. If you want to format sdxc cards in fat32, you need something like this:
http://panasonic.jp/support/global/cs/sd/download/index.html
Hth
Cheers
jknarf
Sent from my HTC Incredible S using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I tried it but its still the same. Is there any other way at all?
jonas000 said:
I tried it but its still the same. Is there any other way at all?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
'Okay, I suggest to format the card with windows to exfat, and than use the panasonic to format it back to fat32. It is necessary to delete the 32gb partiton first and then make a new one with exfat and 64gb. I don't remember if windows will do this trick alone, or you need help from another software like this one:
http://support.airstash.com/entries/20174151-format-sdxc-cards-64gb-to-2tb-for-proper-operation
If everything works and you have one partition with 64gb on it you should use the panasonic tool to make a proper fat32 with a matching partition table on it(windows don't know how to handle partion tables on sd cards).
Hth
Cheers
jknarf
The clue is in the title. Fat32
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The "32" in FAT32 actually describes the amount of Bits available to describe the length of a given file.
Fat32 has 2^32 bits which equals a 4GB file limit.
exFAT (or it's correct name FAT64) uses 64 bits which equals 2^64 bits = 16 Exabyte (=1'048'576 Terabyte)
The maximum disk capacity available for FAT32 is based on the maximum amount of clusters (268,435,445) and the maximum cluster size (32KB) which gives approximately 8 Terabyte. Needless to say, 8TB is vastly higher than 64GB
Use this tool to make it grow back to it's normal size:
http://www.softpedia.com/get/System/Hard-Disk-Utils/HP-USB-Disk-Storage-Format-Tool.shtml
jonas000 said:
I tried it but its still the same. Is there any other way at all?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'll try this again, only this time I will try to turn off "Invisble mode"
rootSU said:
Format it in the phone.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
---------- Post added at 10:35 PM ---------- Previous post was at 10:31 PM ----------
d4fseeker said:
The "32" in FAT32 actually describes the amount of Bits available to describe the length of a given file.
Fat32 has 2^32 bits which equals a 4GB file limit.
exFAT (or it's correct name FAT64) uses 64 bits which equals 2^64 bits = 16 Exabyte (=1'048'576 Terabyte)
The maximum disk capacity available for FAT32 is based on the maximum amount of clusters (268,435,445) and the maximum cluster size (32KB) which gives approximately 8 Terabyte. Needless to say, 8TB is vastly higher than 64GB
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes I know but I wasn't going to tell him that
And actually once not too long ago, yes, the maximum partition size on FAT32 was 32GB. That said, they keep managing to extend the life of this long-past-it's-best file syste,
he maximum partition size on FAT32 was 32GB.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No, FAT32 never had a 32GB disk capacity limit. Windows 2000's implementation of the filesystem has that limit and for compatibility reasons the normal format utility in the 'My computer' section too.
Changing a standard is very bad practice and as in the case with Cat5e->Cat5 only brings confusions and issues.
(Afaik the Windows utility in the Disk Manager works fine with higher capacities, too laze to try it out now though)
d4fseeker said:
No, FAT32 never had a 32GB disk capacity limit. Windows 2000's implementation of the filesystem has that limit and for compatibility reasons the normal format utility in the 'My computer' section too.
Changing a standard is very bad practice and as in the case with Cat5e->Cat5 only brings confusions and issues.
(Afaik the Windows utility in the Disk Manager works fine with higher capacities, too laze to try it out now though)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
OK then Windows 2000 / XP / Vista / 7, Which I assume the OP used (but not 98 which I assume he did NOT use), the maximum size that a FAT32 partition could be formatted without the use of additional tools was / is 32GB.
It's symantics.
You're so intent on correcting my "IT Knowledge" in every thread, I am going to concede and tell you you're right this time, but I'll let you know, it does annoy me somewhat, especially when the corrections are so trivial. They appear to me to be nothing short of one-up-man-ship.
jonas000 said:
I tried it but its still the same. Is there any other way at all?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
In option there are two options quick format and format size adjustment. Make sure you make the adjustment size to 'yes' This will give you your lost 32gb if not you have a fake 64gb card.
rootSU said:
OK then Windows 2000 / XP / Vista / 7, Which I assume the OP used (but not 98 which I assume he did NOT use), the maximum size that a FAT32 partition could be formatted without the use of additional tools was / is 32GB.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Microsoft Knowledge Base said:
The maximum disk size is approximately 8 terabytes when you take into account the following variables: The maximum possible number of clusters on a FAT32 volume is 268,435,445, and there is a maximum of 32 KB per cluster, along with the space required for the file allocation table (FAT).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Source [URL="[/URL]
Cheers
jknarf
jknarf said:
Source [URL="[/URL]
Cheers
jknarf
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What exactly do you think you're proving me wrong on with that?
Sorry the board eat my link. Next try: http://support.microsoft.com/kb/314463/en-us
Cheers
jknarf
Ive seen it. My question remains.
From the same article you cited:
Windows XP can mount and support FAT32 volumes larger than 32 GB (subject to the other limits), but you cannot create a FAT32 volume larger than 32 GB by using the Format tool during Setup.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The Windows format tool cannot format over 32GB. And removable media adds yet another layer of issues.
Had enough, off to watch firefly.
The Windows 32gb limitation makes no sense (only sence is to protect their proprietary exfat format). The maximum size of a fat32 partition depends on the sector size. The maximum sector size that is possible with fat32 is 4096 bytes. This equates a maximum partition size of 16tb.
Cheers and good night
jknarf
jknarf said:
The failure was in using Microsoft die formatting sd-cards. If you want to format sdxc cards in fat32, you need something like this:
http://panasonic.jp/support/global/cs/sd/download/index.html
Hth
Cheers
jknarf
Sent from my HTC Incredible S using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I still cant get anything to work. Its defiantly not a faulty disc but if it caries on like this i'll send it back to play for a replacement. tried formatting with several programs but everything is the same.
Related
Hi,
Can anyone having micro SD 2GB ultra card can tell us about its performance? I have heard that 2Gb card as such had some impact on the performance of the phone and slows it a bit down? Is there any improvement using this faster card?
I have SanDisk 2GB MicroSD - in my opinion it's quicker than my previous 1GB.
I have seen sandisk 2gb ultra II micro sd card in the market. I just wanted to know if it improves the performance over the simple 2gb micro sd card?
i have a SanDisk 2GB standard MicroSD and performance is great, no slow downs on anything.
its a lot faster than a 1Gb card (can't remmeber make, probably SanDisk) that was with my Universal, that was sloooow...
sorry that that doesnt really answer your question, but in my opinion i think that there isn't much gain in opting for the Ultra MicroSD card, as there's not anything wrong with the standard one!
Comparing performance with different flash cards, be sure they are formatted with the same file system (FAT16/FAT32) and the same cluster size. Instead, your comparision results ae meaningless.
Lurker0 said:
Comparing performance with different flash cards, be sure they are formatted with the same file system (FAT16/FAT32) and the same cluster size. Instead, your comparision results ae meaningless.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
And what are the best in your opinion? (cluster size and 16/32)
sergiopi said:
And what are the best in your opinion? (cluster size and 16/32)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'd suggest you to search for existing threads and articles.
There is no a one-for-all solutions. One thing that I'd recommend is to format with one FAT copy (again, do a search). Then, the bigger the cluster size, the better berformance, but, OTOH, the more space is wasted. With a statistics provided e.g. by SK Tools anybody may make their decision on how to balance. SK Tools also a good tol to format cards with.
As for FAT16 vs FAT32, this is the last thing to decide. If a chosen cluster size allows FAT16 for the card, better to use it. If it does not - you have no a choice but to use FAT32. The only drawback of FAT16 is a fixed root directory size, which is not a big isue with large (16K to 64K) cluster sizes required for FAT16 on big cards.
But the main point for this thread still is: comparing flash card speeds, use the same format parameters.
Had anyone done this kind of comparison on different micro sd cards?
It imaging that this level of testing is about pointless, the typical bottleneck here is likely to be the reader device, not the card.
The phone will likely be the slowest aspect, at least when compared to a desktop reader...
You might find a turtle that can sprint, but it will still be a turtle
Hi guys,
I have a 8GB SD Card
when formatting it i can specify a Allocation Unit Size
What should it be? now i'm trying 16kb, i can also go higher like 32 kb ...
whats the difference?
morphnike said:
Hi guys,
I have a 8GB SD Card
when formatting it i can specify a Allocation Unit Size
What should it be? now i'm trying 16kb, i can also go higher like 32 kb ...
whats the difference?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You need to format it by (fat32)
kurt-willems said:
You need to format it by format32
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yes that i know, it is FAT32
but there is also Allocation Unit Size...
does that matter for Android? once I saw somewhere it should be 16 kb, but why?
with my old card, the maximum was 16kb, now with my new card I can go higher... should I?
Few days ago I purchased a 8GB Class 6 SD card. Found somewhere on this forum video of guy testing card on different Allocation size. On his test 32kB gave the best results. So I used 32kB and it is working ok.
sorry i have edited this to remove my question and post in correct forum.
clyder said:
Found somewhere on this forum video of guy testing card on different Allocation size. On his test 32kB gave the best results.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
care to share the link? I'm intrigued, cause my understaning is that bigger cluster size improves speed, but wastes more space (slack after small files)
Hi all,
I just wanted to let everybody know that exfat on the micro sd works on TFP, i have moved a 10gb file with NO problems at all.
Have a nice day all
Sent from my Transformer Prime TF201 using xda premium
exfat and stability issues?
have you noticed any increase in reboots after insert your microSD? My prime has been running great but after plugging in a sandisk 64 gig card two days ago there have been many more reboots, especially with the stock browser. Sine this is the same time frame that the last update was applied I am running it now without the card to see if stability improves.
I had my card formatted with exfat, and I didn't have more random reboots with the card in, but I did have a file that would reboot the device whenever I tried to delete it.
May have had something to do with the beta exfat driver I had on my linux laptop, but even if it was corrupted it shouldn't cause a reboot.
Sent from my SPH-D700 using Tapatalk
May I ask what the advantage of exFat over NTFS is?
As I understand it Exfat was designed exclusively for flash drives.
drherron said:
have you noticed any increase in reboots after insert your microSD? My prime has been running great but after plugging in a sandisk 64 gig card two days ago there have been many more reboots, especially with the stock browser. Sine this is the same time frame that the last update was applied I am running it now without the card to see if stability improves.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I have not had any reboots at all with the microsd and without it
The diffrence between fat32 and exfat is
FAT32 is the file system with which most windows users are most familiar. Windows first supported FAT32 with Windows 95 OSR2 and has increased support for it through XP.
FAT32 has multiple issues that modern systems can experience:
- By default windows systems can only format a drive up to 32 GB. Additional software works around this issue. When formatted at these bigger sizes, FAT32 becomes increasingly inefficient.
- The maximum file size on a FAT32 formatted drive is around 4 GB. With DVD and high resolution DVD formats now available, this limit is commonly noticed.
- Dealing with fragmentation and free disk space calculations can become painfully resource intensive in large FAT32 systems.
- A FAT32 directory can have 65,536 directory entries. Each file or subdirectory can take up multiple entries; therefore, FAT32 directories are limited with how many files it can hold.
exFAT was first released with CE 6.0 but will finally hit the mainstream with Vista SP1. exFAT has several advantages over FAT32:
-File size limit is now 16 exabytes.
- Format size limits and files per directory limits are practically eliminated.
- Like HPFS, exFAT uses free space bitmaps to reduce fragmentation and free space allocation/detection issues.
- Like HTFS, permission systems should be able to be attached through an access control list (ACL). It is unclear if or when Vista will include this feature, however.
In the past most power-users of Microsoft systems have opted to format/convert to a NTFS file system instead.
Interestingly enough, exFAT is not used currently for formatting hard drives. It is being recommended in Flash memory storage and other external devices only. This is why it is currently not considered a huge competitor to NTFS on hard drives.
However, exFAT should be a true competitor to NTFS on systems with limited processing power and memory. NTFS on flash memory has been known to be inefficient for quite some time. exFAT’s smaller footprint/overhead makes it ideal for this purpose. Of course, only if your definition of “ideal” allows software to be proprietary and not open source.
Kur0saki said:
I have not had any reboots at all with the microsd and without it
The diffrence between fat32 and exfat is
FAT32 is the file system with which most windows users are most familiar. Windows first supported FAT32 with Windows 95 OSR2 and has increased support for it through XP.
FAT32 has multiple issues that modern systems can experience:
- By default windows systems can only format a drive up to 32 GB. Additional software works around this issue. When formatted at these bigger sizes, FAT32 becomes increasingly inefficient.
- The maximum file size on a FAT32 formatted drive is around 4 GB. With DVD and high resolution DVD formats now available, this limit is commonly noticed.
- Dealing with fragmentation and free disk space calculations can become painfully resource intensive in large FAT32 systems.
- A FAT32 directory can have 65,536 directory entries. Each file or subdirectory can take up multiple entries; therefore, FAT32 directories are limited with how many files it can hold.
exFAT was first released with CE 6.0 but will finally hit the mainstream with Vista SP1. exFAT has several advantages over FAT32:
-File size limit is now 16 exabytes.
- Format size limits and files per directory limits are practically eliminated.
- Like HPFS, exFAT uses free space bitmaps to reduce fragmentation and free space allocation/detection issues.
- Like HTFS, permission systems should be able to be attached through an access control list (ACL). It is unclear if or when Vista will include this feature, however.
In the past most power-users of Microsoft systems have opted to format/convert to a NTFS file system instead.
Interestingly enough, exFAT is not used currently for formatting hard drives. It is being recommended in Flash memory storage and other external devices only. This is why it is currently not considered a huge competitor to NTFS on hard drives.
However, exFAT should be a true competitor to NTFS on systems with limited processing power and memory. NTFS on flash memory has been known to be inefficient for quite some time. exFAT’s smaller footprint/overhead makes it ideal for this purpose. Of course, only if your definition of “ideal” allows software to be proprietary and not open source.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nice copy and paste ... However he asked about NTFS vs exFAT.
As said a couple of posts above, exFAT is supposed to be faster and less hungry than NTFS, you will notice very little difference though.
Personally, i'd go with NTFS.
How do I format a micro sd? Would I do it through the Prime?
Danny-B- said:
Nice copy and paste ... However he asked about NTFS vs exFAT.
As said a couple of posts above, exFAT is supposed to be faster and less hungry than NTFS, you will notice very little difference though.
Personally, i'd go with NTFS.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So what i copy pasted, dont needed to take that tone!!!
Can TFP read NTFS microsd?
I put the micro sd in an adapter and formatet in the pc, just right click on it and pick format.
drherron said:
have you noticed any increase in reboots after insert your microSD? My prime has been running great but after plugging in a sandisk 64 gig card two days ago there have been many more reboots, especially with the stock browser. Sine this is the same time frame that the last update was applied I am running it now without the card to see if stability improves.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I thought 32GB was max?
Sent from my Xoom using xda premium
mutiny said:
I thought 32GB was max?
Sent from my Xoom using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
this one is SDXC... I think 64 gig is another advantage of exFAT and NTFS over FAT32
the prime can read an sdxc????
makeshiftballer said:
the prime can read an sdxc????
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
every android phone can do, I have it on my DHD
Sent from my HTC Desire HD A9191 using xda premium
in win7 i can choose between 32k and the new 64k when formatting the card. which should I do which is best for the phone,or should I just format it in recovery?
dyetheskin said:
in win7 i can choose between 32k and the new 64k when formatting the card. which should I do which is best for the phone,or should I just format it in recovery?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What file format? FAT32?
Generally I just leave it at the stock settings, which I believe is 4K allocation unit size. Android runs off a ton of smaller files, I think the larger allocation unit sizing is just going to be inefficient on space. Since this is flash based storage there probably is going to be minimal or no performance differences, I would think.
**edit**
nevermind, I need to read things first. For the SDCARD, which is mostly general storage, small file sizes arent likely a reason to opt for 4k over 32k or 64k, but I still don't know if you'll get any performance gain. Honestly, try both and benchmark them. Let us know if one is for some reason significantly better than the others..
I just benchmarked 14 tests between both 32K and 64K allocation unit sizes and 7 different caches between 128 and 4096. The sweet spot for me was 64K when formatting the card and setting sd-booster to 4096. my card is a 32gb lexar sdhc class 10. I get roughly 9.1 for write and 22.6 for read.
What did you use to format? When I put my 64gb sdxc card I got a message saying the card is damaged would you like to format it and I said why yes, I would like to format it and it just did it without any options. All I know is that it formatted as FAT32. Can I check in the phone what allocation unit size it is at?
feralicious said:
What did you use to format? When I put my 64gb sdxc card I got a message saying the card is damaged would you like to format it and I said why yes, I would like to format it and it just did it without any options. All I know is that it formatted as FAT32. Can I check in the phone what allocation unit size it is at?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
no you cant check on the device. the options are in windows7 in the format screen
sent from tapatalk on my rezound
dyetheskin said:
no you cant check on the device. the options are in windows7 in the format screen
sent from tapatalk on my rezound
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Okay, thanks. I formatted in the phone since I figured it would format it properly. I saw that it was FAT32 when I was putting some music on it but never check anything further than that.
Antutu Benchmark results (my card is class 6):
Write - (5.0 MB/s) 50
Read - (5.7 MB/s) 57
Internal card results:
Write - (7.0 MB/s) 70
Read - (6.4 MB/s) 64
I have no idea if that's good or bad. My first smartphone so I've never had to pay that much attention to this stuff.
Were your speeds MB/s also? If so, maybe I'll try reformatting, although mine is class 6 so I don't know how much to allow for that.
I also saw something about Android OS supposedly not supporting more than 32gb but mine is 64gb. Would that be a factor?
Allocation size should be based on "average file size"
If apps, keep it smaller, or the normal 4k. Music/movies, you can up it a few notches.
Benchmarking this with benchmark programs are useless as they have preset small files they use to bench the speeds. Being flash memory, allocation size will also most likely put forth no noticeable speed difference on already speed limited SD cards. if seektime mattered, allocation would also. in our cases allocation only has the effect of potentially wasting space.
just use the smallest allocation size for the most use of the space on your card. you select higher allocation unit sizes, all the teeny files android and apps use will take up the amount of space equal to the allocation size, regardless of its true size (4k allocation means ALL files take a minimum of 4K, or in increments of 4K. therefore files <4k take 4k, 4+ to 8 take 8k, 8+ to 12 take 12k.)
Yes 64gb cards are usually fine on aneroid. What are keeping on there, pron???
Sent from my Kindle Fire using Tapatalk
nrfitchett4 said:
Yes 64gb cards are usually fine on aneroid. What are keeping on there, pron???
Sent from my Kindle Fire using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I never keep pron on my aneroid. I wouldn't know how to get it on/in (?) there!
lol mmm Pron
the SD card I have is called SanDisk ultra 64gb class 10.
The first time I inserted into the phone, it ask to be formatted.
after a few weeks and almost filling it up full, I noticed that saving stuff on it is extremely slow.
I ran benchmark to confirm my suspicion
Sent from my EVO using xda premium
raclimja said:
the SD card I have is called SanDisk ultra 64gb class 10.
The first time I inserted into the phone, it ask to be formatted.
after a few weeks and almost filling it up full, I noticed that saving stuff on it is extremely slow.
I ran benchmark to confirm my suspicion
Sent from my EVO using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ok so let me get this straight, the test file you are using is about 144MB and the only space you have left on your card is 194MB? Have you tried deleting a few files then running the test again?
Are you having any other problems. I know the phone specs says it only supports up to 32gb MicroSDHD card. The one you are using is a MicroSDXD card. I was thinking about getting one of those off amazon but there were alot of reviews from people with android phones that said it worked initially but then had all kinds of errors and problems after running the card for awhile. How long have you been using yours?
use the app SD TOOLS.. run that app and see what u get for a score...
INMHO this issue is coming from sdcard cluster size. i own a htc hero and a adata 8gb class6 sdcard.
usually ,because i use ext partition, i formatted sdcard under recovery (amonra or cm) and the cluster size is 4k . in this condition the write speed is arround 1MB/s .
studying this issue and after some digging in android i found that default cluster size is 68k ??? .... anyway using any OS or cmd line in a computer and formating with 64k cluster size will give best results regarding sdcard write speed .
with 64k cluster size i get 8-10 MB/s ....
i think the issue is coming because recovery's format the card with 4k cluster size
at least this is happen in my case with htc hero recovery's
so , just set cluster at 64k and it will work (i hope )
tachita said:
INMHO this issue is coming from sdcard cluster size. i own a htc hero and a adata 8gb class6 sdcard.
usually ,because i use ext partition, i formatted sdcard under recovery (amonra or cm) and the cluster size is 4k . in this condition the write speed is arround 1MB/s .
studying this issue and after some digging in android i found that default cluster size is 68k ??? .... anyway using any OS or cmd line in a computer and formating with 64k cluster size will give best results regarding sdcard write speed .
with 64k cluster size i get 8-10 MB/s ....
i think the issue is coming because recovery's format the card with 4k cluster size
at least this is happen in my case with htc hero recovery's
so , just set cluster at 64k and it will work (i hope )
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks Tac, this actually gave my class6 10.3write & 20.1read
jauger said:
Thanks Tac, this actually gave my class6 10.3write & 20.1read
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
@jauger ,
can you tell me what utility use for testing sdcard speed: sd tools, sdcard speed test , A1 SD bench, sdcard tester ?
sd tools give me amazing results ... outside of my sdcard class 6 range
1 SD bench is in testing stage for me
sdcard tester require adobe air and for my device generation i think is too much hassle to make it run and even if i make it run can give poor results
sdcard speed test even if is discontinued it is very close to reality and real behaviour of my sdcard
PS: regarding sdcard speed test, it would be nice to post test results only at first run of app because a 2nd test it will give higher troughput from obvious reasons