Objective  To compare the capability of two stroke recognition methods “Suddens” and “FAST” for identifying warning signs of stroke and transient ischemic attack (TIA). Methods  Cases of stroke/TIA that were consecutively admitted in hospital were selected. The initial symptoms of patients were obtained from medical records. Results  A total of 1 877 patients with stroke/TIA were collected and initial symptoms of 19.6% of them could not be included in “FAST”, while initial symptoms of 0.5% of them could not be included in the “Suddens”. “Suddens” identified all ischemic stroke and missed 1.8% of TIA, 1.1% of the intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH), and 1.2% of the subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH). “FAST” missed 7.3% of the ischemic stroke, 12.7% of the TIA, 23.5% of the ICH, and 94.5% of the SAH. Conclusion  “FAST” can identify most stroke/TIA, but the recognition ability is inferior to “Suddens”. The recognition ability of “FAST” towards ischemic stroke and TIA is better than that towards ICH and the recognition ability towards SAH is very poor.