Which one is better and what are the advantages of each? NFTS VS EXFAT

NTFS was enabled in the linux kernel about one year ago. I've never used it. I'm not sure the linux world will embrace it wholesale. although both filesystems are MS proprietary, I'm under the impression FAT in general is far more versatile--edit, as in truly cross-platforms (mac linux ms).
As for which is built to last and the particulars, I don't know, I will stay tuned. It's an interesting subject.

Way to many differences to list them all you will need to do your own research, but from memory these are the highlights and usecases.

• FAT16 should basically never be used anymore.
• FAT32 brought improvements over FAT16 such as to the max volume / partition / file size. Still used where there is no need for the features on more modern file systems such as COW, Journaling etc and maximum compatibility is important as it can be read easily by pretty much every OS / device. Some cameras might require FAT32, same with doing a BIOS/UEFI update etc .
• NTFS much like FAT32 brought volume / partition / file size improvements, support for access control lists and file system encryption were probably the big things for Windows land. It is Windows main / modern file system outside of the server space.
• EXFAT can be thought of as an improved FAT32 that is optimised for use on usb flash drives / sd cards.

There are of course performance differences between every file system in existence.

So it really depends on your use case as to what is best. If you are formatting a drive/partition that is not a EFI partition and never has to be accessed by Windows or some device that has a very limited list of supported file systems, then I would not advise using any of those.

NTFS New Technology File System comes from Windows NT. NTFS is the successor to OS/2 HPFS. NTFS is a Journaling File System. By the way, you can turn off Journaling in NTFS, which will speed things up just a little. exFAT is the only file system that is fully supported on both macOS and Windows that can hold files larger than 4 GB. The original FAT is very limited, goes all the way back to the days of DOS, but was and is compatible with just about everything. A good source of information https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File_system

A few thoughts:

(1) Within a modern Linux environment, FAT32, EXFAT and NTFS formatting is relevant only to non-system internal and external data storage drives. Except for EFI partitions (which are formated in FAT32), none are relevant to Linux system drives because most modern Linux distros format data partitions on system drives as Ext4 by default.

(2) FAT32 is lightweight and compatible with almost every operating system. For that reason, FAT32 is a good choice for flash drives, SD drives, and other storage devices used to transfer 4GB and under files between devices. Because of the file size limitation, FAT32 is not a good choice for internal or external SSD's and HHD's or for portable storage devices used to transfer files over 4GB.

(3) EXFAT is lightweight, compatible with Windows, Linux, modern versions of macOS, and Android. EXFAT is not as universally compatible as FAT32, however, and might be incompatible with some devices (SLR cameras, smartwatches, older game boxes and so on). EXFAT removes the 4GB file size limitation present in FAT32, but is otherwise similar in most respects (read/write speed and so on), and is useful for SSD and HHD drives and storage devices used to transfer games and other applications with large file sizes.

(4) Neither FAT32 nor EXFAT support journalling or native encryption, and, as a result, would not be good choices for installing/maintaining operating systems.

(5) NTFS was developed primarily for Windows. NTFS supports journalling, native encryption, compression, reparsing and other features used by Windows and seems to be increasingly a critical component of Windows 11's security schema. Windows formats as NTFS by default. Starting with 5.15, the Linux kernel can read/write to NTFS drives via NTFS3 and I assume that Linux compatibility will continue if new NTFS versions develop. macOS has included native NTFS read/write support since version 10.6, although I've read that compatibility can sometimes be problematic. I don't use macOS so I have no personal experience with NTFS on macOS.

(6) In my view, NTFS is better suited to Windows than Linux, although I have had no problems using NTFS drives for data storage under Linux kernel 5.15 and no longer bother to reformat an NTFS-formatted data drive to EXFAT before I install it in a Linux computer. In my use case, where I run Windows and Linux computers in parallel and want to be able to swap data drives between Windows and Linux computers, that is a convenience.

tomscharbach NTFS is better suited to Windows than Linux, although I have had no problems using NTFS drives for data storage under Linux kernel 5.15 and no longer bother to reformat an NTFS-formatted data drive to EXFAT before I install it in a Linux computer. In my use case, where I run Windows and Linux computers in parallel and want to be able to swap data drives between Windows and Linux computers, that is a convenience.

really good to know this as far as the storage/data part....I was always led to believe (common internet myth?) that this (ntfs) was neither feasible nor do-able with linux....yet you do it.
So you are saying, for example, you buy a 2TB Toshiba external drive...or a $5 sansdisk usb....and format it in windows using the default ntfs. then you plug in your ntfs-formatted disk or usb into a port when running solus...and it's flawlessly cross-platform with no noticeable differences? edit: and mounts with no hassle, etc?

I've hedged my bets with fat32/fat for storage & usb's for so long.....I did not know there was an alternative.

Also a second question if I may trouble you. part of my fat32 phobia is because my life is tri-platform and bump into macs quite often with my usb data....can a mac read an ntfs-formated usb drive?

brent .I was always led to believe (common internet myth?) that this (ntfs) was neither feasible nor do-able with linux....yet you do it.

Its been possible for as long as I can remember. There is just zero benefit to Linux users outside of read / write compatibility with Windows and I assume mac. It does have downsides that users may care about such as NTFS not being able to retain Linux file permissions.

If you only need the drive for Linux, do not use NTFS.

If you need compatibility with Windows / mac NTFS may help as might FAT32 and to a lesser degree EXFAT. Depends which version of Windows you are using, some did not come with EXFAT support but it may still be possible to add it.

Despite no experience in doing so. I have no doubt macs can read FAT32. EFI partitions must be in FAT12/16/32 or they are not UEFI compatible. Edit for clarity that would mean that modern systems would not boot.

Kevinsotovalle And EXT4 vs NTFS vs EXFAT for linux?

Ext4 is the default format used by most distros for data storage paritions on system drives. If you do a clean install of Solus and most other distros, your data partition will be formatted Ext4, as below:

Ext4 brings a lot to the table that EXFAT doesn't, but I've never tried to format a data storage drive with Ext4 because most of what Ext4 (like NTFS) brings to the table is irrelevant to simple data storage detached from the operating system. Ext4 is not cross-compatible with Windows unless the WSL is installed, and then only for limited purposes. Ext4 just isn't on my radar screen as a data storage format.

Wikipedia has a reasonably good description of Ext4. I loosely think of NTFS and Ext4 as similar, in the sense that both create a filesystem that supports the needs of a modern operating system -- Windows in the case of NTFS and Linux in the case of Ext4. EXFAT doesn't have the features needed to do that, in my opinion, but it is fine for data storage.