Here is a table that summarizes the differences between partimage and fsarchiver. This page shows the pros and cons of each solution.
| Description | fsarchiver | partimage |
|---|---|---|
| Ability to save/restore standard linux filesystems (ext2, ext3, reiserfs, xfs, jfs) | Yes | Yes |
| Ability to save/restore new generation linux filesystems (ext4, reiser4, btrfs) | Yes | No |
| Ability to save/restore windows ntfs filesystems | Yes (experimental) | Yes (experimental) |
| Requires kernel filesystem or fuse support for a filesystem to be supposed | Yes | No |
| Ability to restore the filesystem to a partition which is smaller than the original | Yes | No |
| Ability to restore the filesystem to a partition which is bigger than the original | Yes | Requires resizefs |
| Requires filesystem tools such as mkfs to be installed to save the filesystem | No | No |
| Requires filesystem tools such as mkfs to be installed to restore the filesystem | Yes | No |
| Checksumming of the data and ability to restore corrupt archives | Yes | No |
| Compression algorithms which are supported | lzo, lz4, gzip, bzip2, xz, zstd | gzip, bzip2 |
| Multi-threaded compression to make it faster on computers with multiple cores/cpu | Yes | No |
| Ability to encrypt the data with a password | Yes | No |
| Information taken into account to save the filesystem | Files | Blocks |
| User interface that comes with the program by default | Text | Semi-graphical |