Normal Format vs Quick Format

[notsobig]

I am about to install my OS and I wondered what's the difference betweeen normal and quick format? I've always used quick format in the past and never experienced any HDD problem to be honest, but there must be some difference otherwise there's no meaning to have normal format? So which do you guys usually do, normal or quick?

[abeacock]

Quick format just deletes any existing files & folders.
Normal format does the above and checks the disk for an errors.

Do a normal format for a brand new disk, maybe a quick if you are doing a reinstall.

More information here on the Microsoft site:
http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=302686

[dave87]

If its my main install of an OS - ie XP Pro on my laptop - Normal.

However, when I tried a few different OSs on the same pc (spare one) quick because I didn't have the time

[dangel]

Quick, always.

[notsobig]

Wow, didn't know that! Thanks, I'll do normal format this time then.

[cotswoldcs]

I must admit I always do a normal format - I just go away and leave it to get on with it. For all the hassle involved in doing a reinstall I want to make certain I do everything as well as possible.

I'm interested to read that others use the quick format so much. I don't think that you can do a quick format on a brand new disk - but maybe you can these days???

[dangel]

Quick format works just fine on newly created partitions - and why wouldn't it? It's not as though a 'normal' format actually does anything different in terms of formatting the drive

[dodgybob]

I've always used normal format for a new disk ever since I had a bad 120gb sata seagate 7200.7 a few years ago. I would have saved myself a lot of trouble and lost data if I hadn't gone for the quick option. It was only later that i realised that it would pass a quick format but fail a normal one. Must have been a bad batch, had two bad ones in a row before i paid the extra for a 160gb model

Edit: Those drives had seeks like a morse code machine too, eventually sold the 160gb and purchased one of the 1st western digital drives with a fluid bearing motor to replace it as my boot drive.

[funnelhead]

ya - normal format the first time - then quick - then switch back to normal when it starts getting old in case its about to die

[dangel]

ya - normal format the first time - then quick - then switch back to normal when it starts getting old in case its about to die

I just monitor the SMART info from the drive - it's far more revealing about when a drive is encountering problems

[Bluecube]

AFAIK Quick format resets the FAT to show that the disk (or partition) is empty. Any data actually on the disk will still be present (for you paranoid types!) I'm not 100% about a normal format does but I think it goes through the entire disk and resets each "bit of space" (techy term?) to 0.

[Koolpc]

I use quick on new discs too. Never had a problem.

[dangel]

AFAIK Quick format resets the FAT to show that the disk (or partition) is empty. Any data actually on the disk will still be present (for you paranoid types!) I'm not 100% about a normal format does but I think it goes through the entire disk and resets each "bit of space" (techy term?) to 0.

No, BOTH format types do the same actual format - i.e. it doesn't remove the physical file data - the ONLY difference is that one (Normal) runs a chkdsk AFTER formatting.

[Clunk]

i use quick as well, unless there may be a problem with the disk.

[Bluecube]

No, BOTH format types do the same actual format - i.e. it doesn't remove the physical file data - the ONLY difference is that one (Normal) runs a chkdsk AFTER formatting.

Bang on. Here it is straight from the horse's mouth

[dangel]

Bang on. Here it is straight from the horse's mouth

Umm yeah - it's the link in the second post up the top of the thread

You must be having a day like me - i've just spent the morning writing useless code