编辑“︁NTFS-3G”︁（章节）

== 效能 ==
2007年与2008年的两个評測顯示，NTFS-3G的驅動程式效能已能與其它一些使用FUSE的檔案系統相比，但較依賴[[CPU]]的效能，表示NTFS-3G尚未完成對效能的[[最佳化]]。<ref>{{cite web|title=比較 JFS、XFS、NTFS-3G 和 ZFS-FUSE 的效能|url=http://www.csamuel.org/2007/04/25/comparing-ntfs-3g-to-zfs-fuse-for-fuse-performance/|accessdate=2008-04-23|archive-date=2008-04-30|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080430081403/http://www.csamuel.org/2007/04/25/comparing-ntfs-3g-to-zfs-fuse-for-fuse-performance/|dead-url=no}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|title=10 個檔案系統的評測|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20080216123527/http://www.ntfs-3g.org/performance.html|archivedate=2008-02-16|url=http://www.ntfs-3g.org/performance.html|accessdate=2017-09-05|dead-url=yes}}</ref>

Tuxera官方的使用手冊及NTFS-3G[[手册页]]上也提到，NTFS-3G當前的開發焦點仍集中在可靠性和實作欠缺的[[POSIX]]功能性，存取效能並不是優先考量的，至少需要效能較好的CPU方能取得較好的存取效能。<ref>{{Cite web |url=https://www.tuxera.com/products/tuxera-ntfs-commercial/performance/ |title=Performance at Tuxera |accessdate=2018-04-02 |archive-date=2011-05-22 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110522073141/http://www.tuxera.com/products/tuxera-ntfs-commercial/performance/ |dead-url=no }}</ref>在一些較老的系統或需要低功耗的[[嵌入式裝置]]上，高CPU使用量會極大地限制NTFS-3G的存取效能（尤其是寫入效能），<ref>{{cite web|title=Raspberry Pi 2 vs Banana Pi ext4 vs NTFS vs exFAT •|url=https://www.htpcguides.com/raspberry-pi-2-vs-banana-pi-ext4-vs-ntfs-vs-exfat/|website=HTPC Guides|date=2015-03-19|accessdate=2018-04-05|archive-date=2017-07-19|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170719154908/https://www.htpcguides.com/raspberry-pi-2-vs-banana-pi-ext4-vs-ntfs-vs-exfat/|dead-url=no}}</ref>[[OpenWRT]]/[[LEDE]]的官方說明文檔中也告知對效能較爲注意的使用者儘量避免使用NTFS檔案系統。<ref>{{cite web|title=OpenWrt Project: Filesystems|url=https://openwrt.org/docs/guide-user/storage/filesystems-and-partitions#windows_filesystems|website=openwrt.org|language=en|accessdate=2018-04-05|archive-date=2018-04-05|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180405215103/https://openwrt.org/docs/guide-user/storage/filesystems-and-partitions#windows_filesystems|dead-url=no}}</ref>