So, the SD card gets formatted with FAT32. As most of you know, you can't transfer large files (over 2GB) with FAT32. This is a problem when you want to store a full 720p movie on your phone since they usually run 4-7GB.
Any chance of a different format coming for the Evo? I just don't see 720p and HDMI out being all that useful with a 2GB file limit.
How is everyone else handling this? I suppose I could break up a HD movie into 3 or 4 parts and create a playlist for playback on a HDTV, but this is more work than I want to go through.
And what about the rumored 1080p phones that are coming out? Are they going to compress video even more than our Evo to be able to keep file sizes within reason?
wrxlvr said:
As most of you know, you can't transfer large files (over 2GB) with FAT32
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No...the file size limit with FAT32 is about 4GB.
Minjin said:
No...the file size limit with FAT32 is about 4GB.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My bad. But that's still not 7GB (or more once we start seeing 1080p phones). I've seen people saying the Evo has issues playing files larger than 2GB, do we know why this is?
i think android supports other linux-compatible file systems but those don't work on windows. and fat32 blows.
I, myself, am pretty frustrated over this issue also but even more so over the "EVO does not play files larger then 2GB" issue.
For now what I do is I convert the movies I want to put on the EVO to a .mp4 file under 2GB with a bitrate around 2Mbps. Looks good on the EVO screen but once you put that on the big 50" screen over HDMI you can see the step down in quality, even though I could still call it "HD"
I have enough space, and i cant put a 4gb movie on my phone, 720p mkv.
Im assuming the phone is FAT not NTFS how can i change this or get the movie on the phone?
Thanks
You're right, it is fat32, so no, I don't think that you can. I believe that all sim cards are formatted as fat32. You could go and try to format it to ntfs via windows, I think that could work?
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App
afive720 said:
You're right, it is fat32, so no, I don't think that you can. I believe that all sim cards are formatted as fat32. You could go and try to format it to ntfs via windows, I think that could work?
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hmm. I remember from G1 you could format as EXT3/4, but edit: the other half had to be Fat32. Damn.
The thing is, you might be able to format it to NTFS, but that doesn't guarantee that the phone has NTFS support
designerfx said:
Hmm. I remember from G1 you could format as EXT3/4, but edit: the other half had to be Fat32. Damn.
The thing is, you might be able to format it to NTFS, but that doesn't guarantee that the phone has NTFS support
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yea, But if he's willing to try, he'd find out lol
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App
We need a custom kernel before we can start adding ext support...
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App
The phone DOES NOT have ntsc support. The only way you're going to get that movie on you phone is to down-convert it. Handbrake can take care of that for you. Besides, who needs a 1080p bluray rip in their phone.
Sent from my SGH-T959 using Tapatalk
bahnburner said:
The phone DOES NOT have ntsc support. The only way you're going to get that movie on you phone is to down-convert it. Handbrake can take care of that for you. Besides, who needs a 1080p bluray rip in their phone.
Sent from my SGH-T959 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
...wat?
They're talking about file systems, not tv broadcast formats.
Unless you typoed NTFS.
Also, 4gb movie files are not 1080p Bluray rips. More like 8-9gb for a 1080p, 4gb is a 720p, and you CAN tell the difference between SD and HD on the Vibrant's screen. Not so much on a lesser screen.
Unfortunately for the OP, the phone doesn't support NTFS, so you will need to re-encode the video to a lower bit-rate to get it on the sdcard or internal memory.
raduque said:
...wat?
They're talking about file systems, not tv broadcast formats.
Unless you typoed NTFS.
Also, 4gb movie files are not 1080p Bluray rips. More like 8-9gb for a 1080p, 4gb is a 720p, and you CAN tell the difference between SD and HD on the Vibrant's screen. Not so much on a lesser screen.
Unfortunately for the OP, the phone doesn't support NTFS, so you will need to re-encode the video to a lower bit-rate to get it on the sdcard or internal memory.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My bad, I meant NTFS. It's my day off and I'm just not waking up. My brain's not fully awake just yet. I do have some 4gb 1080p BD rips. They're made for the PS3, since it has the same issue with fat32. And yeah, you really can tell the difference between HD and SD on the Vibrant's screen. Regardless, down-converting it to 2.5-3gb isn't going to drop quality too bad.
I thought android has a 2GB limit on file sizes.
Get mkv2vob its for the playstation 3 but it will make your dts mkv's ac3 for you and split them for fat32 use and put it in a mpeg container by default.
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App
Thanks for the info guys =) Downconvert it is
No reason not to anyways other than saving time since the phone can only do 800x480. If you downconvert you got more space to fit other movies in.
To All,
I did a bit of testing on Micro SD cards All claimed they were class 10 in other words they should (as claimed by the manufacturers) to read and write 10 mb per sec
The Reality is the only one that really hit that mark was the Wintec which also was cheap)
I used two of the sd card testers from the app store. One called sd card tester the other was ssd card tester (one was free one cost a buck)
I did the tests using various buffer size (2, 4 and 8 mb) did it 3 times and averaged. This is not scientific but it did show that there is alot of misrepresentation going on...........
The findings are as follows
Wintec averaged 9.3 write and 12.5 down
Patriot 7.8 write and 10 read
king max 7mb write and 8.2 read
Kingston 6 write and 8 read (what a dog)
None could really reach the 10 write threshold consistently. So, basically what I would recommend is read up and do your research and watch out for false review claims from the manufacturers.
I am now using the Wintec 16 gig and it does improve the response of the phone when writing or reading from the sd card. But this nothing compared to the awesome custom roms found in our dev forum. There is where the speed resides
It was fun doing this hope this helps some .........
That is weird because I have the Kingston 16gb Class 10 microsd card and I transferred my avatar movie at 11-12mb/s.
I found out that if you format the card through the phone, the speeds are slow. But if you format the card through windows, that card is fast.
mdkxtreme said:
That is weird because I have the Kingston 16gb Class 10 microsd card and I transferred my avatar movie at 11-12mb/s.
I found out that if you format the card through the phone, the speeds are slow. But if you format the card through windows, that card is fast.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
probably a file system difference. formatting in windows will make it ntfs, formatting on the phone will format it to...? rfs? fat32?
No I didn't format it in NTFS. I formatted to FAT32.
Ntfs has better perdormance than fat, anyways, so I dunno what he means by that.
Its cause the cards are low qual. Kingstons inclided. There was a huge article by someone on the internet about them (not directly the speeds, though).
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App
N8ter said:
Ntfs has better perdormance than fat, anyways, so I dunno what he means by that.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
that was my point, that if you formatted it ntfs in windows it would perform better than the phone's formatting (which is probably fat32). but looking into it, i don't think android supports ntfs.
Like I said guys, I formatted in FAT32 and it outperformed the phone's formatting scheme. I didn't know I could format it in NTFS because I didn't know if it would work or not so I formatted in FAT32
yea NTFS wont work on android
Formatting on the phone is standard fat is all it recognizes it is possible if you are on 4ext instead of 2e (stock like my phone) then you could get better speeds. The problem as one of you stated is the low quality control, all these cards rarely get the stated speeds.
Yea, I made my initial statement knowing it didn't support NTFS.
But the other person gave me the idea that he thought NTFS would give lower performance than FAT32.
And yes, even Kingston's expensive cards are in many cases low quality cards, Sandisk as well.
That is why most knowledgeable users prefer a hefty amount of NAND storage in the phone as well as an SD slot just in case we need a bit more storage (and that's part of the reason the Galaxy S is so popular as well... No other Android phone has this much in-built storage).
N8ter said:
Yea, I made my initial statement knowing it didn't support NTFS.
But the other person gave me the idea that he thought NTFS would give lower performance than FAT32.
And yes, even Kingston's expensive cards are in many cases low quality cards, Sandisk as well.
That is why most knowledgeable users prefer a hefty amount of NAND storage in the phone as well as an SD slot just in case we need a bit more storage (and that's part of the reason the Galaxy S is so popular as well... No other Android phone has this much in-built storage).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well put that is one of the reasons why I like this phone so many things are well thought out and yes san disk is real junk I never use them on my nikon they write way slow......
N8ter said:
Ntfs has better perdormance than fat, anyways, so I dunno what he means by that.
Its cause the cards are low qual. Kingstons inclided. There was a huge article by someone on the internet about them (not directly the speeds, though).
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
http://www.testfreaks.com/blog/information/usb-flash-drive-comparison-part-2-fat32-vs-ntfs-vs-exfat/
I terms of speed NTFS came in last.
Hey OP, thanks for the test though. Because of this I am returning my Kingston for the Wintec since it's 50 dollars cheaper. Not countering or complaining about this thread, it's just I think most people get different results when it comes to SD cards. I actually thought about it and don't even need that high of a speed for external microsd because my nand is fast enough. Thus the reason why I want the lower pricing. Thanks again for the results.
t1n0m3n said:
http://www.testfreaks.com/blog/information/usb-flash-drive-comparison-part-2-fat32-vs-ntfs-vs-exfat/
I terms of speed NTFS came in last.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's almost a 2 year old article, and it's hardly scientific.
It fails to mention a bunch of factors that affect the performance of NTFS, and doesn't really optimize the other filesystems for the media.
FAT32 is a simple file system with no security, encryption, and recoverability. FAT scaled up for larger volume sizes, basically. (using Fat32 is the reason why Android cannot encrypt SD cards).
NTFS performace scales up (i.e. gets better) the larger the volume gets. FAT32 performance scales down (i.e. gets worse) the larger the volume gets. Typically above 8GB it's better to use NTFS, if you can. The largest size in that article is 8GB and the disks weren't used in a way to really show how the filesystems perform in common scenarios (i.e. searching for files on a disk with lots of files that's 75% full, where NTFS would best FAT easily).
Testing NTFS vs. FAT32 on a bunch of 4GB and 8GB memory sticks proves nothing.
It's not January 2009 anymore. Lots of people have 32 GB+ memory cards/thumb drives and FAT32 performance simply does not scale up at all to those volume levels (not to mention it doesn't support volumes over 32GB without a modified version) compared to NTFS, which gain in performance as the volume size grows larger.
In addition to that, formatting as FAT32 wastes lots of space compared to NTFS. It has HUGE cluster sizes on large volumes (i.e. 16-32GB microSD cards).
exFAT is a pretty good middle road between the two, but NTFS will probably outperform it on large volumes. Its performance is more consistent than FAT32, though.
SD and Thumb drive filesystems corrupt more when formatted as FAT, compared to NTFS, as well.
That article you linked is useless.
N8ter said:
That article you linked is useless.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Since the file systems are older than the article, I don't see how that article doesn't apply.
You are are welcome to link your own test. Give more proof than your word. (Because I, for one, do not believe you.) In terms of raw speed, in our phone, on an SD card (with it's size limitations) ... Give more proof. The other factors are irrelevant to this discussion IMO, due to the discussion being about performance (I infer "performance" to mean "speed" due to the discussion about SD card speed.) Although they are admittedly important, I think you are just trying to use them as a point of obfuscation to try to worm your way out the erroneous statement:
N8ter said:
Ntfs has better perdormance than fat...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
A link to a test performed would do nicely.
I picked up Patriot 8gb class 10 from frys yesterday. I haven't done any tests but the card is significantly faster than stock 2gb card. When i started transferring my files to new card, i thought i copied them to wrong location cause it was going so fast.
I'll run few tests and post results.
mrxela said:
I picked up Patriot 8gb class 10 from frys yesterday. I haven't done any tests but the card is significantly faster than stock 2gb card. When i started transferring my files to new card, i thought i copied them to wrong location cause it was going so fast.
I'll run few tests and post results.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I would be very interested in seeing these results, I have yet to see a card faster than a SanDisk Class 6 8GB. However, I would like to start seeing some Class 10 16GB cards that step up to compete with the SanDisk in terms of raw speed.
t1n0m3n said:
Since the file systems are older than the article, I don't see how that article doesn't apply.
You are are welcome to link your own test. Give more proof than your word. (Because I, for one, do not believe you.) In terms of raw speed, in our phone, on an SD card (with it's size limitations) ... Give more proof. The other factors are irrelevant to this discussion IMO, due to the discussion being about performance (I infer "performance" to mean "speed" due to the discussion about SD card speed.) Although they are admittedly important, I think you are just trying to use them as a point of obfuscation to try to worm your way out the erroneous statement:
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Anyone with any knowledge about filesystems knows that FAT32 performance degrades when the size of the volume increases. That is why FAT32 has a maximum volume size of 32GB (without workarounds) and even a low maximum file threshold on the volume. It can also hold a low maximum number of files on the volume, because a FAT32 volume with as much files as NTFS supports would probably crash and burn.
When you a volume with a lot of files on it, NTFS will outperform FAT.
If that wasn't the case, Microsoft would have simply added the security and fault tolerate features (among other things) on top of FAT instead of developing NTFS for Windows NT.
FAT lived long because:
1. It's simple to implement, which makes it a great system for inter-OS compatibility.
2. Consumer disk sizes did not grow at a rate proportional to server storage sizes during the reign of pre-NT consumer Winodws OS.
3. Reliability and Security on consumer OSes (including Macs and PCs) simply wasn't taken all that seriously back in the day.
4. Hardly anyone with a PC had a volumes with a ridiculous amount of files on them.
Performance is more than just raw speed. NTFS is faster at searching for files on large volumes than FAT32 - why do you think Media scanner takes forever when you have tons of files on the SD card? It stores small files in the MFT if they can fit there, which makes accessing them monumentally faster than FAT, etc.
The robustness of a filesystem is a component of its performance.
Look at any HD2 thread and one thing you always see is "make sure to format your SD card before installing Android to it, to avoid constant FC's."
The only three advantages over NTFS that FAT32 has is that it is very fast on small volumes (and by volume I mean Capacity as well as the amount of data on the disk), it's relatively cross platform, and it doesn't fragment as much, due to larger cluster sizes (but fragmentation is not much of an issue on flash disks, unless they have very bad random I/O performance).
No links to back you up... Most of what you are talking about doesn't apply in context of this thread. Were this a thread about a pc you would have some valid points.
I am done.
Eat at Joe's
I'm not talking about a PC. I'm talking about storage cards. Load up a 32 GB card with 20GB of music and Albulm Art/Meta Data, Documents, etc. and then compare the FS performance.
I'm sorry you have no idea what you're talking about, that you want me to scour the internet to "back up" something any decent developer/IT professional can agree with.
LOL @ Troll. Were you not the one who responded with a one liner of inconsequential info in an article from almost 2 years ago (Microsoft improved NTFS. NTFS in Win7 isn't the same as NTFS in Windows XP, 2000, or NT 3.1).
At least you got fed.
Like I said, that article you linked is not a "test" in any serious use of the word. I'm not going buy SD cards/thumbdrives to do any sort of test, and I'm certainly not Googling for you. If you want to verify, you can do that yourself. Ad hominems, do not help your point.
Ciao!
Hi Everyone...
I Will Be New To Galaxy Tab On Wednesday
I Almoust Studied The Whole Forum...
There Is Just This One Question I Couldnt Get An Answere For...
Everyone Is Watching 720p and 1080p Movies On The Tab...
But How To Transfer 4-5-6-7 GB Movies to FAT32...
Do You Need To Split Every Movie Before Transfering It...???
Or Can The SD CARD Be NTFS?
FAT32 has a limit of 2TB not 2GB. a 7GB file can be transferred to the FAT32 microSD card without problem.
As Far As I Know Is The File Size Limitation 4GB for FAT32...
I Am Danm SURE About That...
You Can Not Transfer A File That Is ONE PIECE And Bigger Than 4GB In Size...!!!
Bulut.O said:
As Far As I Know Is The File Size Limitation 4GB for FAT32...
I Am Danm SURE About That...
You Can Not Transfer A File That Is ONE PIECE And Bigger Than 4GB In Size...!!!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is correct. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fat32#FAT32
The maximum possible size for a file on a FAT32 volume is 4 GiB minus 1 byte or 4,294,967,295 (232−1) bytes.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Bulut.O said:
As Far As I Know Is The File Size Limitation 4GB for FAT32...
I Am Danm SURE About That...
You Can Not Transfer A File That Is ONE PIECE And Bigger Than 4GB In Size...!!!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't split my movies, but I do use Ripbot to condense them down to <4GB so that I can put them on my Fat32 drive. It works like a charm. Let me know if you want details as to how I rip my blu-rays.
Phone_Junkie said:
I don't split my movies, but I do use Ripbot to condense them down to <4GB so that I can put them on my Fat32 drive. It works like a charm. Let me know if you want details as to how I rip my blu-rays.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
LET ME KNOW
Sure I Want To Know... Thx In Advance For Your Answere And Your Offer
I want to put bluray movies on my sandisk ultra micro sd 64 gb card to use on my galaxy s5 that i get from a friend. i also wantr to be able to record for as long as I want.What file format will S5 support for this since my s3 couldn't do it. I'm not into rooting so thats not an option.
Thanks,
Bumo
Sent from my SM-G900T using XDA Free mobile app
The format of the SD card is what matters here I believe, I think its Fat32 that you need, look it up, between ext and fat32 one of them can only store files up to a particular size, 4GB if i remember right, I think its Fat32 you need, but like I said, double check..you also won't need to root either. Hope this helps, FYI watching blue ray on a five inch screen is going to be wasted, a ripped BRay would be alright, usually about 2GB and both file systems can take that size.