Windows 7: Flash Drive Speed

I have a Corsair Flash Voyager pen drive that I installed the Windows 7 setup files on, before my DVDs arrived. I used it to install the RTM on my primary rig, and just a couple of days ago, I tried using it again on my secondary rig, but both times the screen where is says that it is loading Windows files moved like a sick snail across the screen. I thought that it would be faster than the DVD, but that definitely is not the case. I'm going to delete the files on it, to use it for general purposes, but it's performance has me wondering if there is something wrong with the drive, or if it's behavior is typical?

Make sure USB 2.0 is enabled in the BIOS. You might also try formatting the drive and starting over.

2.0 is enabled and at High Speed, so that shouldn't be the issue. I was just thinking of deleting the files on it, but it would be just as easy to reformat, so I try that. I know about the file size limitation of FAT32, but is there any kind of problem with formatting it NTSF? The reason that I ask, is because I understand that FAT32 is generally used on flash drives, but a 4GB limit kind of restricts how I might want to use the drive.

To put the files on the thumb drive, you need to format it with NTFS. Try this: USB Windows 7 Installation Key Drive - Create

I use method 2 because it's faster.

When I initially created the Windows 7 key on the drive, I used the Microsoft USB/DVD Tool to do so. I don't remember now, but I imagine that it used NTSF to do so. That may be the reason for the speed issue...I don't know. Why is FAT32 preferred for thumb drives...is it a speed factor?

Don't use FAT32 for an installation drive... it only works with NTFS. NTFS is faster, I believe.

That is the point, with the way that it performs now, I do not want to use it as an installation drive. I'm not certain exactly how I will use it, but it may just become an archive drive. Therefore, I'm interested in how FAT32 performs vs NTSF, without consideration of it's use as an installation drive.

Try this: FAT and NTFS performance

Thanks, that was an interesting read, even though the writer's native language apparently isn't English, because his phraseology is often awkward, leaving a person guessing at his meaning at times. This is also complicated by the fact that his focus on files systems only targeted harddrives...not flash drives.

What he did say would lead one to think that NTSF would be the preferred FS for flash drives, but it isn't, so I'm still left scratching my head some.

FAT32 is preferred because NTFS has indexing (which makes writes on the drive) and little compatibility between anything non-MS

Advantages of FAT32
No File/Folder Permissions (can't lock yourself out of a file)
No "Wear and Tear" on a drive
Can be faster than NTFS (look at benchmarks)
Greater Compatibility between many OS

Advantages of NTFS
File/Folder Permissions (Can lock others out of a file)
Can have single files of 4GB or higher on the drive

Now...lets introduce exFAT

Advantages of exFAT
Take FAT32 + single files over 4GB - Greater Compatibility between many OS

Reccomendation? FAT32

If anyone has anything more to add...than please do so