Refs file system (stand alone NOT Storage spaces)

jimbo45 · Oct 6, 2025

Hi folks
Anybody have any experience of using the Refs file system in a stand alone environment i.e NOT as Storage spaces (which IMHO is a hideous way of implementing a Windows Software RIAD system and often breaks).

I know you can't have Refs as the boot system but does it work decently on other partitions / drives and other machines access the system for shared drives.

One could enable the system in Windows 10 and on Windows server editions but has anybody had a go with any W11 edition.

Cheers
jimbo

spapakons · Oct 6, 2025

If there is no benefit in performance, I would rather not sacrifice compatibility and stick to NTFS. This way I will be able to recover my data from a Live USB, while with ReFS I will get into trouble. No thanks! I value backwards compatibility more than anything else. For the same reason I wasn't that happy when Windows Vista demanded NTFS and I had to convert my Windows XP FAT32 disk to NTFS in order to upgrade to Vista because back then it wasn't easy to access NTFS disks outside Windows.

PS: I Googled ReFS and it seems Windows Setup lets you choose either NTFS or ReFS to install Windows 11 Pro for Workstations or Enterprise. I don't know about "regular" Windows 10 Pro and Home, probably ReFS is not supported at all.

jimbo45 · Oct 6, 2025

spapakons said:
If there is no benefit in performance, I would rather not sacrifice compatibility and stick to NTFS. This way I will be able to recover my data from a Live USB, while with ReFS I will get into trouble. No thanks! I value backwards compatibility more than anything else. For the same reason I wasn't that happy when Windows Vista demanded NTFS and I had to convert my Windows XP FAT32 disk to NTFS in order to upgrade to Vista because back then it wasn't easy to access NTFS disks outside Windows.

PS: I Googled ReFS and it seems Windows Setup lets you choose wither NTFS or ReFS to install Windows 11 Pro for Workstations or Enterprise. I don't know about "regular" Windows 10 Pro and Home, probably ReFS is not supported at all.

Thanks for the post -- but I really want to hear from people who have tried this and their experiences with it.
NTFS definitely is aging -- it's been around for donkeys years while disk technology and OS software has improved dramatically over the years. Since home based computers have got to the point where CPU processing and more RAM doesn't really improve the typical user response - the biggest bottleneck is usually in the I/O subsystem (both software and hardware). I'm surprised in at least a beta or development version of W11 there wouldn't be some attempt at a more modern file system to be introduced as an option.

Cheers
jimbo

Cheers
jimbo

spapakons · Oct 6, 2025

There is no attempt because NTFS is as fast as it can on fast NVMe disks. I don't think you will notice any difference in performance on a mere SATA III SSD, let alone a fast NVMe disk. So why sacrifice compatibility and introduce issues? "Μην εισάγεις καινά δαιμόνια", "Don't introduce new daemons" (meaning new concepts that usually lead to new trouble), as Ancient Greeks said. Or "If it works, don't fix it", as you say in English.

maur0 · Oct 6, 2025

is posisble install windows on refs looking

so it doesn't have any advantage, same speed as NTFS, It's more interesting to use NTFS and for greater speed, use a 64k cluster instead of 4k or 8k, which is the default.

spapakons · Oct 6, 2025

If it is same speed (or the speed improvement is too small to realize), then it's not worth it. Keep good old NTFS to have maximum compatibility. It might be safer, or less prone to errors, but I will pass. Backwards compatibility is much more important for me.

maur0 · Oct 6, 2025

spapakons said:
There is no attempt because NTFS is as fast as it can on fast NVMe disks. I don't think you will notice any difference in performance on a mere SATA III SSD, let alone a fast NVMe disk. So why sacrifice compatibility and introduce issues? "Μην εισάγεις καινά δαιμόνια", "Don't introduce new daemons" (meaning new concepts that usually lead to new trouble), as Ancient Greeks said. Or "If it works, don't fix it", as you say in English.

Do you think that a 64k cluster helps when creating an NTFS partition instead of the standard 4k or 8k?

maur0 · Oct 6, 2025

spapakons said:
If it is same speed (or the speed improvement is too small to realize), then it's not worth it. Keep good old NTFS to have maximum compatibility. It might be safer, or less prone to errors, but I will pass. Backwards compatibility is much more important for me.

the best cluster size is 64k or more is the best for speed?

spapakons · Oct 6, 2025

If the capacity of the disk is huge, then you cannot use as small cluster size as you want. The total number of clusters cannot exceed the maximum number, I don't remember how this is calculated, but you get the point. I usually let Windows decide. Back when disk sizes were less than 100GB, it would make a difference to add a few more MB. No the difference is negligible.

maur0 · Oct 6, 2025

Using a larger NTFS cluster size like 64KB can improve performance in specific scenarios, but it's not universally beneficial for all devices or workloads. Here's a breakdown in English:

Does a 64KB NTFS Cluster Size Improve Speed?

For ultra-fast NVMe PCIe 5.0 SSDs:
- These drives typically use a native 4KB sector size.
- NTFS default cluster size (4KB) aligns well with this, offering optimal IOPS (input/output operations per second).
- Increasing the cluster size to 64KB may improve sequential throughput for large files, but can reduce performance for small files or random access.
- Larger clusters can also increase slack space (wasted storage), especially with many small files.
For large HDDs (e.g., 30TB):
- HDDs benefit more from larger cluster sizes like 64KB, especially when storing large files (e.g., backups, media).
- The reduced number of clusters can improve file system efficiency and reduce fragmentation.
Going beyond 64KB (e.g., 128KB, 256KB):
- NTFS supports cluster sizes up to 2MB, but anything above 64KB is rarely recommended.
- Larger clusters may further boost sequential read/write speeds for very large files, but they also increase slack space and can trigger more I/O amplification (extra internal operations).
- Compatibility issues may arise with certain applications or system utilities.

Best Practice

Use 64KB clusters for:
- Large HDDs storing big files
- Backup volumes
- Media libraries
Stick with 4KB or 8KB clusters for:
- System drives
- SSDs with high IOPS needs
- Mixed workloads with many small files

Would you like help choosing the best cluster size for a specific use case or device?

spapakons · Oct 6, 2025

Like I said, there is no perceptible difference, so I let Windows choose the cluster size every time I format a disk.

Hopachi · Oct 6, 2025

Hi @jimbo45

I use ReFS on some of my internal data disks. All works fine. Games, not that I play much, are saved there too and the VMs also there with no issues.
Even old DOS sfuff in DosBox runs from my ReFS partition, programs are all happy; the host OS handles it pretty well.

Thing is I used ReFS from the Win8.1 era on one data drive and sticked to it since then. It was moved over in Win10 without issues and I still am able to access it in Win11 so yes it seems pretty stable.

Performance wise maybe some granular enhancements but I cannot tell, the SSDs are blazing fast.
Copying is for sure pretty fast on ReFS it seems, especially if you got a bunch of VHDX files on it.

Best way to see it in action, use it on a spare disk if you can.

Note:
Last time I checked, ReFS is not available for external / portable / usb drives, only internal SATA / NVMe drives can be formatted as such.

jimbo45 · Oct 6, 2025

Hopachi said:
Hi @jimbo45

I use ReFS on some of my internal data disks. All works fine. Games, not that I play much, are saved there too and the VMs also there with no issues.
Even old DOS sfuff in DosBox runs from my ReFS partition, programs are all happy; the host OS handles it pretty well.

Thing is I used ReFS from the Win8.1 era on one data drive and sticked to it since then. It was moved over in Win10 without issues and I still am able to access it in Win11 so yes it seems pretty stable.

Performance wise maybe some granular enhancements but I cannot tell, the SSDs are blazing fast.
Copying is for sure pretty fast on ReFS it seems, especially if you got a bunch of VHDX files on it.

Best way to see it in action, use it on a spare disk if you can.

Note:
Last time I checked, ReFS is not available for external / portable / usb drives, only internal SATA / NVMe drives can be formatted as such.

On a VM an external USB drive can have what Windows thinks is an internal drive on it/
Cheers
jimbo

spapakons · Oct 6, 2025

Google reveals there is a procedure to enable ReFS disk access in "regular" Windows 11 Home/Pro and create a USB flash drive from the Windows 11 ISO with ReFS access enabled. So You can boot with this USB flash drive and clean install Windows 11 Home/Pro on ReFS formatted disk. If I remember correctly, you must first invoke Diskpart to format the disk as ReFS since Setup won't let you do it. If Setup finds the ReFS partition is will let you install Windows there. But I would try on a spare disk first as suggested. Ideally you should test it on two identical disks, one formatted as NTFS and the other as ReFS, same Windows version, same drivers, same configuration and compare performance. I bet you won't be able to tell the difference.

Hopachi · Oct 6, 2025

jimbo45 said:
On a VM an external USB drive can have what Windows thinks is an internal drive on it/
Cheers
jimbo

Yeah, like that it works, indeed.

Hopachi · Oct 6, 2025

spapakons said:
Google reveals there is a procedure to enable ReFS disk access in "regular" Windows 11 Home/Pro and create a USB flash drive from the Windows 11 ISO with ReFS access enabled. So You can boot with this USB flash drive and clean install Windows 11 Home/Pro on ReFS formatted disk. If I remember correctly, you must first invoke Diskpart to format the disk as ReFS since Setup won't let you do it. If Setup finds the ReFS partition is will let you install Windows there. But I would try on a spare disk first as suggested. Ideally you should test it on two identical disks, one formatted as NTFS and the other as ReFS, same Windows version, same drivers, same configuration and compare performance. I bet you won't be able to tell the difference.

Interesting for testing. Thanks.
Though on my daily driver -used as system disk- I stick to NTFS. Until they officially allow ReFS via setup install.

spapakons · Oct 6, 2025

Learn How to Install on ReFS Partition Today | Windows 11 Installation Made Simple

Have you ever thought about installing your Windows 11 on ReFS partition? This article is going to give you a full guide on how to install Windows 11 on ReFS partition with a full tutorial.

www.easeus.com

jimbo45 · Oct 6, 2025

I've got an old spare "MiniPC" which I can install an extra 2.5 inch "classic SSD" drive -- it's running Windows server 2025 so I'll have a test with that.

Here's the current system (just updating to latest server (canary) version.

I've fiddled with this system to make it run as a "Desktop OS" !!.

BTW seems extremely efficient even on the minPC with quite limited hardware compared with "Bog standard" versions of W11

Cheers
jimbo

spapakons · Oct 6, 2025

Older Windows Server versions required to enable the Desktop role and tweak Internet Explorer security settings to let you load all sites. Current versions all you need it enable the Desktop role (or install the ISO with Desktop enabled by default) to act as standard Windows version.

jimbo45 · Oct 6, 2025

spapakons said:
Older Windows Server versions required to enable the Desktop role and tweak Internet Explorer security settings to let you load all sites. Current versions all you need it enable the Desktop role (or install the ISO with Desktop enabled by default) to act as standard Windows version.

However to use as a decent Desktop / workstation there's quite a few things you need to do -- like ALT+CTRL+DEL to logon, Server prompts after logon, nag issues when you want to shut down and re-boot etc etc.

OK Servers weren't designed for people like me to use them as desktop OS's -- but it's actually fun if your workplace allows you a license (Windows servers are EXPENSIVE for non corporates).

What I'm surprised at is that 99% of typical programs (at least the ones I use) including Ms Office install just fine without wanting a "Server" version. Macrium doesn't but who cares since the stand alone bootable utility can backup/restore/browse images.

You can actually also get a 180 day free trial of Windows Server - which can be extended 5 times via the slmgr command -- although you need to do a FREE registration - so if you want "to have a go" try it.

I do like the interface (include desktop experience when installing) as it has the best features from both W10 amd W11.

Cheers
jimbo

Refs file system (stand alone NOT Storage spaces)

Well-known member

My Computer

Well-known member

My Computers

Well-known member

My Computer

Well-known member

My Computers

Well-known member

My Computer

Well-known member

My Computers

Well-known member

My Computer

Well-known member

My Computer

Well-known member

My Computers

Well-known member

Does a 64KB NTFS Cluster Size Improve Speed?​

Best Practice​

My Computer

Well-known member

My Computers

Well-known member

My Computers

Well-known member

My Computer

Well-known member

My Computers

Well-known member

My Computers

Well-known member

My Computers

Well-known member

My Computers

Well-known member

My Computer

Well-known member

My Computers

Well-known member

My Computer

Similar threads

Does a 64KB NTFS Cluster Size Improve Speed?

Best Practice