From: firstlast{at}compuserve.com.omit (John Beckett)

Interesting - thanks for the clarification. I just confirmed your point.
Created a FAT32 partition with 512-byte clusters, then converted it to
NTFS. As you say, the result is 512-byte clusters.

For some reason, I thought I had noticed that if XP was installed on FAT,
then converted to NTFS, you got 4K clusters (assuming normal-sized disks).
However, maybe that was only because the XP computers had quite large
partitions and so had large FAT cluster sizes to start with.

John


On Wed, 14 May 2003 18:56:11 -0700, "Rich"  wrote:
>   The NTFS cluster size can be set lower than the FAT/FAT32 cluster =
>size but not larger.  Your example is FAT.  With FAT32 the cluster size =
>would be smaller.  I don't remember what the default FAT32 cluster size =
>is.
>
>Rich
>
>  "John Beckett"  wrote
in message =
>news:3ec2eba0.267744185{at}news.barkto.com...
>  As a matter of interest, when XP and W2003 systems convert a FAT
>  partition to NTFS, the result has 4K clusters. There may well be
>  other, more sublte, benefits from a native-formatted NTFS partition,
>  but cluster size is now set appropriately during a conversion.
>
>  Here are some extracts from an evaluation Windows Server 2003:
>
>  C:\>chkdsk e:
>  The type of the file system is FAT.
>  2,097,152,000 bytes total disk space.
>  2,097,152,000 bytes available on disk.
>         32,768 bytes in each allocation unit.
>         64,000 total allocation units on disk.
>         64,000 allocation units available on disk.
>
>  C:\>convert e: /fs:ntfs
>
>  C:\>chkdsk e:
>  The type of the file system is NTFS.
>     2048287 KB total disk space.
>        4096 bytes in each allocation unit.
>      512071 total allocation units on disk.
>      508867 allocation units available on disk.
>
>  John

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-4