Fall 2004 DVDR Roundup: Dual Layer and 16X DVD+R
by Anand Shimpi & Virginia Lee on November 1, 2004 12:05 AM EST- Posted in
- Storage
Write Tests
How else would we gauge a group of DVD burners if not by their write performance? We have compiled our results from the benchmarks that we have performed with a few types of media to which these drives are capable of writing.
As we begin to move into the realm of DVDs, we tend to forget about how each DVD burner will handle CDR media. Our results show that all of the drives can burn CDR media above an average of 29X speeds with exception to the DVR-108D which averaged a 24.95X write. The NEC ND-3500A tops out at slightly above the 36X mark to take the CDR charts.
The focus of our 16X roundup ultimately hinges on DVD write speed and quality.
Here again, the ND-3500A tops the charts by writing to the Mitsubishi 8x DVD-R media at an average of 10.22x speeds. LiteOn is left behind at the end of the list with an average writing speed of 6.04x.
Pioneer has the MCC 003 media in its grasp as it burns a complete Mitsubishi DVD+R, which is rated at 8x speeds, at an average actual speed of 10.01X. Let's see how it does with the Ritek media.
We expected the both the 108D and the ND-3500A to perform better on the Ritek media, but as the graphs show, they broke the 8x barrier, but not quickly enough to bring the average write speed above 8x. Sony's DRU-710A just barely made it to second to last while the first place position was taken, for this media, by LG's GSA-4160B at an average of 7.81X.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
65 Comments
View All Comments
Maverick215 - Monday, November 1, 2004 - link
1) where are the 8x disc quality tests, it seems you only did -r, 16x, and DL2) who cares about DL at $10 a disc I have to quote you, "read/write capabilities are not really useful in applications for the common end user."
3) who cares about 16x
a)it's not readily available
b) will likely be more expensive when it is
c) no realized speed improvement (your review states 11.9x max for 16x and 11.88 max for 8x media @ 12x (again we don't know the burn quality of this 8x@12 burn but you gave the result)
given these I'd have to say "read/write capabilities are not really useful in applications for the common end user." again.
----
And to just take one drive here, the benq, you used a BETA firmware, it might be fair if you used a BETA of a upcoming release, but you used a BETA that is 3 public releases and atleast 5 weeks old. you consider NEC more mature, why not give Benq etc a chance to mature? At the very least you could say all burners were updated as of xyz date, at least we would have a reference point. And we could then understand that infact you started doing this comparison 5 weeks ago.
----
That minor point aside. If you really care what is applicable to the "common end user" then why not more 8x media with the price of said media and then that media's burn quality tests(16x has a use here in comparing burn quality). 8x is what's most readily available, 8x@12x is comparable burn speed to 16x.
Sorry but this review just leaves me with an empty feeling. Perhaps I am alone in my opinion, but I can live with that.
Reflex - Monday, November 1, 2004 - link
Nice to know I made the right choice a month and a half ago when I grabbed the 3500A. It wasn't anything more than me looking for a bargain for a Media Center PC, so I just lucked into the best drive it appears.BTW, where do you find the latest firmware for this stuff? And are there any good reccomendations on softare, seeing as OEM drives don't come with it usually...
AkumaX - Monday, November 1, 2004 - link
don't really care about speed, but which burner has the best COMPATIBILITY and RELIABILITY in terms of burning? the 108D or the 3500A or something else?mkruer - Monday, November 1, 2004 - link
So I take it DVD+R/RW won the format wars. BTW that would be a good article in itself. Why IS there a difference between the two formats (that’s -R vs +R)KristopherKubicki - Monday, November 1, 2004 - link
Most of the drives we reviewed are the OEM versions - they pretty much all look identical (flat, beige/black, one button).Kristopher
PuravSanghani - Monday, November 1, 2004 - link
OCedHrt: Errors have been fixed for your viewing pleasure :)Operandi - Monday, November 1, 2004 - link
xsilver: If the drive is a re-badge then just say so in the artical, I don't think a picture is required.My point is simply that if your going get pics of the drives you should be taking pics of the portion people will be looking at. Other pics are fine but not geing bezel shoots dosn't make any sense to me.
OCedHrt - Monday, November 1, 2004 - link
Hmm dunno how to edit. The CD-R write speed for the Pioneer between the graph and the table at the end is also different.OCedHrt - Monday, November 1, 2004 - link
The description for the Ritek G05 read test doesn't match the graph at all. One of them is wrong.xsilver - Monday, November 1, 2004 - link
I think the circuit pcb thing is a good idea -- some drives a just rebadges of other drives? (asus?) so to tell you look that the pcb / insides