I confess it's been a long time since I've messed with FAT clusters, but generally, that statement is correct - the larger the drive space, the larger the FAT clusters have to be. 64K is the largest that FAT32 really supports with any kind of usefulness. I seem to remember that FAT32 gets very fussy once you get past 200GB, and tools out there won't format things larger than this. I believe the spec doesn't go beyond that, but don't quote me there. exFAT was created to solve this issue for flash drives, and NTFS for hard drives. You can format flash to NTFS but as it's journaling system, you wear your flash out quicker with journal and information writes. If you're not using GNU/Linux, there's a tool for Windows (which refuses to format things larger than 32GB as FAT32) that can format for you. It's called fat32format and you can get it here: http://www.ridgecrop.demon.co.uk/index.htm?fat32format.htm It's one of the tools that I keep in my arsenal.