C't test results. burners.

by **Scour** on Mon Nov 21, 2005 8:27 am

Francksoy wrote:
I notice better quality (much less PIFs) in the FIRST part of the burn (+/- 1GB) with the 4550A than with the Pioneer. The Pioneer starts @6X and on the scans one can see the PIFs starting higher and progressively get lower until +/- 1GB. From there on, the results are similar between the 4550A and the 110D with these discs.

Let's not forget that 6X writing is, in theory, the maximum possible speed to burn the inner area of a DVDR (yes, even the 16X rated ones) with good quality. NEC chooses security over speed (Z-CLV 4X-6X-8X) and it proves to be, with some media but not all, better than the more 'brutal' 6X-8X strategy of the Pioneer that will give a hard time to some discs in the very first part of the burn.

The Benq 1640 uses P-CAV 8x, starting @ 6,5x and it´s quality is also high with most media, so I guess that starting with 6x is no problem for 8x-media. Maybe the 4x-strategy from NEC is better than at higher speeds.

BTW, the LG 4163 starts with ca 7,4x when it writes a medium @16x

by **frank1** on Mon Nov 21, 2005 8:55 am

I suppose that it is: MKM 003
But thanks again for your summary !

Code: Select all: DVD+R DL 8x Bound Verbatim not: MKM 01RD30 it is: MKM 003 AxialN [mu] 0.2 0.16 RadialN [nm] 25 0.47 (**) RRO [mu] 70 43.1 Mech. Index/ Grade 70 / + Writing quality 0 Clim. Stability --

(**) The RadialN value reported may be incorrect: it doesn't jibe with previous results or with limits.

by **MediumRare** on Mon Nov 21, 2005 9:16 am

frank1 wrote:I suppose that it is: MKM 003

Yes, you're right. It was listed incorrectly in the c't article

- but MKM 01RD30 is DVD-DL media. I'll change the entry in the summary.

G

by **Gabe** on Wed Nov 23, 2005 10:41 am

Good work, MediumRare =D>

I bought the c´t-magazine, but it´s nice to have the results avaible on every PC with Internet

by **inspaine** on Sat Nov 26, 2005 6:23 pm

NEC does well a writer, but has poor DVD error correction and is loud- not a good DVD-reader, but good CD error correction. The DL media have high jitter values on the second layer- hence 4x recommendation

Hi!
How is the noise of the nd-4550 at lower dvd speeds (any whine or other noises)? compared to the "competing drives" Benq, Pioneer?

Thank you

by **MediumRare** on Mon Nov 28, 2005 1:48 am

According to c't, the NEC didn't slow down at all while playing a DVD (movie), but kept the revs up at maximum. Very loud. It was the only drive in this lot that did that. :-?

The Panasonic was the quietest, followed by Pioneer.

G

by **MediumRare** on Sun Feb 05, 2006 7:25 pm

It's been a while, but there's another test of DVD-Burners and media in the latest issue of c't No. 4/2006 on sale in Europe tomorrow.

The same issue has a first look at the Samsung BluRay and NEC HD-DVD drives that Ian reported in last week's news: NEC, Samsung. The print article brings little new information, so I won't say more about it.

Media
They looked at 5 "new" media types- one is a Labelflash variety (almost twice the price of the others

). The physical properties were analyzed by Audiodev from unburnt discs. The c't weighted mechanical quality index is based on these results. The available information is summarized in the following table:

Code: Select all: DVD-R 16x DVD+R 16x DVD-R 16x LF DVD+R 16x DVD+R DL 8x Bound BenQ BenQ Fuji Film Plextor Ricoh Daxon 016S Daxon AZ3 Ritek F1 Yuden000 T03 RICOHJPN D01 AxialN [mu] 0.2 0.12 0.10 0.09 0.08 0.19 RadialN [nm] 25 34.0 25.0 26.0 20.0 26.0 RRO [mu] 70 21.0 65.0 19.0 17.0 27.0 Mech. Index/ Grade 76 / ++ 67 / + 84 / ++ 88 / ++ 60 / + Writing quality 0 - 0 0 -- Clim. Stability 0 -- 0 0 +

The writing quality is an average based on the results of the burner tests below and (of course) depends on the firmware used there.

These discs all show excellent mechanical properties (particularly the Plextor media), the compatibility with the tested drives is not so good- the firmware needs work. The TY media are not as "compatible" as the DVD-R variety- even the Plextor drive has problems- but this lies in the firmware (the discs are excellent mechanically).

The BenQ media have similar mechanical properties and burn quality, but the dash discs do much better than the plus variety in the climatic stabilty test. The latter are not recommended for long term storage.

The Fuji LabelFlash even improved in one case after the climatic torture test- but are too expensive for use other than in a LabelFlash drive.

Most of the drives couldn't write to the second layer of the Ricoh DL media- they apparently have problems with the inverted stack production method. In that light, the excellent climatic stability is irrelevant.

Drives
There are 5 drives in the test this time- most with LightScribe (or LabelFlash) and/or DVD-RAM capability.
As usual, I'll tabulate the c't quality index along with the grade (see http://www.cdrlabs.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?p=101936#101936 for a description of this index and the grade).

The first table contains model and firmware and the c't grade for various categories. The quality and speed ratings for DVDs are now combined in a single grade.

Code: Select all: DVD Burns Reading Noise Model + Firmware R / RW / DL CD / DVD CD/VideoDVD BenQ BCAC + / -- / 0 + / ++ 0 / -- DW1650 BenQ BCAB 0 / 0 / 0 + / + 0 / -- DW1655 NEC 1.07 0 / + / - 0 / - 0 / -- ND-4551A Plextor 1.01 0 / -- / -- + / + 0 / - PX-750A Plextor 1.01 - / -- / -- + / + 0 / + PX-755A

The next tables contains the actual and recommended burning speed for these drives and selected media. The recommended speed is based on details of the scans (NO means "do not use"). The second line shows the c't quality index and grade (# means POFs occurred).

As usual, a burning cascade was carried out for RW's (a CD-Speed data disk is used for the +-R results). A number in parentheses here, e.g. (3), indicates a recommended speed from the third burn on.

First: 8x LightScribe, RW and DL Media

Code: Select all: DVD+R 8x DVD+R DL 8x DVD-R DL 4x DVD+RW 8x DVD-RW 6x LightScribe Ricoh MCC (Verb.) Ricoh Verbatim Verb MCC 003 RICOHJPN D01 MKM 01RD30 RICOHJPN W21 MKM 01RW6X01 Model BenQ 8 / 8 8 / NO 4 / 4 8 / 2.4 6 / 6(3) DW1650 48 / 0 -125 / -- 74 / + -454 / -- -85 / --# BenQ 8 / 8 8 / NO 4 / 4 8 / 2.4 6 / 6 DW1655 45 / 0 -108 / --# 71 / + -7 / -- 79 / ++ NEC 8 / 8 8 / 4 6 / 6 8 / 8 6 / 6 ND-4551A 61 / + -110 / --# 41 / 0 57 / + 67 / + Plextor 8 / 8 2.4 / NO 4 / NO 8 / NO ? / NO PX-750A 63 / + -290 / --# -258 / --# -12 / -- ? / ? Plextor 12 / NO 8 / NO 6 / 2.4 8 / NO 6 / NO PX-755A -409 / --# -354/ --# 27 / 0 -302 / --# -164 / --#

The Plextor PX-755A was tested without autostrategy.

Next: 16x +R and -R Media. Here the Plextor PX-755A appears twice: with and without AutoStrategy.

Code: Select all: DVD+R 16x DVD-R 16x DVD+R 16x DVD-R 16x DVD-R 16x BenQ BenQ Taiyo Yuden Taiyo Yuden Fuji Film Daxon AZ31 Daxon 016S Yuden000 T03 TYG03 Ritek F1 Model BenQ 16 / 12 8 / 8 4 / 4 16 / 16 16 / 16 DW1650 31 / 0 80 / ++ 59 / + 60 / + 58 / + BenQ 16 / 12 16 / 12 16 / 12 16 / 16 16 / 12 DW1655 43 / 0 43 / 0 31 / 0 50 / + -76 / --# NEC 16 / 12 16 / 12 16 / 12 16 / 16 16 / 12 ND-4551A -4 / -- 19 / - -17 / -- 57 / + 45 / 0 Plextor 4 / 4 16 / NO 16 / 12 16 / 12 4 / 4 PX-750A 37 / 0 -695 / --# 48 / 0 37 / 0 66 / + Plextor 16 / 8 16 / 8 16 / 8 16 / 8 16 / 12 PX-755A AS -252 / --# 5 / - -3 / -- 31 / 0 63 / + Plextor no 16 / NO 8 / NO 16 / 12 16 / 16 12 / 4 PX-755A AS -459 / --# -641 / --# -9 / -- 68 / + -314 / --#

Some remarks:

CD-Rs were only tested with a single burn with TY media. Aparently CD's are "unproblematic" and are not given much weight.
The new BenQ 1650 and 1655 have similarly good results as the 1640 did. Solidburn allow successful burns of single layer media without strategies implemented in the firmware- albeit at reduced speeds. It does not help with DL or RW media. The differing results between these drives result from the somewhat older FW in the 1655.
LabelFlash (NEC) is faster and more resistant to bleaching (light) than Lightscribe (BenQ 1655), but is more difficult to read because the glossy surface loves reflections and fingerprints.
NEC does well a writer, but has poor DVD error correction and is loud- not a good DVD-reader, but good CD error correction. It does better with the DL and RW media tested than the other drives. A peculiarity: the discs burned by the NEC did better in the climatic tests than those from the BenQ DW1650. Just what this means remains to be seen.
The Plextor PX-750A can use the Panasonic drivers to write to DVD-RAM and is OK with single layer media. The results for other media types are terrible.
Plextor PX-755A relies on Autostrategy for unknown media types- but does not do a good job with them (in contrast to BenQ). The TY DVD-R were better without AS than with it turned on (as recommended by Plextor). The writing quality is not good with this FW. One of the few things going for this expensive drive is the diagnostics offered by the Plextools (PIE, POE, beta, jitter, focus and tracking error).

Personally, I would have prefered to have some more established media in the tests (e.g. Verbatim 16x). Other than TYG03, this is mostly new and exotic stuff that doesn't allow a fair comparison with previously tested drives.

G

by **Francksoy** on Sun Feb 05, 2006 7:52 pm

Thanks a lot MediumRare, always a pleasure to come here to read your transcriptions =D>

A peculiarity: the discs burned by the NEC did better in the climatic tests than those from the BenQ DW1650. Just what this means remains to be seen.

Indeed!

by **Scour** on Sun Feb 05, 2006 8:07 pm

Hello!

Again Thanks to MediumRare

It´s a shame for Plextor, the most epensive writer is one of the worst you can buy.

The 1650 looks better than the newer 1655

BTW, there´s a typo in the media-table, 016S = Benq -R and AZ31 = Benq +R

by **dolphinius_rex** on Sun Feb 05, 2006 11:25 pm

Scour:

The DW1655 was using an older firmware, so knowing BenQ, it's probably much closer or even better then the DW1650 now.

by **dodecahedron** on Sun Feb 05, 2006 11:50 pm

off topic, but what's the differences between the 1650 and 1655, apart from LightScribe? are there any at all ???

by **MediumRare** on Mon Feb 06, 2006 2:02 am

Scour wrote:BTW, there´s a typo in the media-table, 016S = Benq -R and AZ31 = Benq +R

Fixed it- I'd copied the codes from the first table to the 16x table.

BTW- is anyone else seeing line breaks in the first table (I'm using Firefox 1.5.x). There used to be horizontal scroll bars here.

G

by **dodecahedron** on Mon Feb 06, 2006 2:17 am

MediumRare wrote:BTW- is anyone else seeing line breaks in the first table (I'm using Firefox 1.5.x). There used to be horizontal scroll bars here.

really? i don't remember horizontal scrollbars! i'll take your word for it.

anyway, yes, line breaks in 1st, 3rd and 4th tables. FireFox 1.5.0.1
but that's only when the browser window is just the right size for the forum. if maximized then no problem.

by **MediumRare** on Mon Feb 06, 2006 4:24 am

dodecahedron wrote:
MediumRare wrote:BTW- is anyone else seeing line breaks in the first table (I'm using Firefox 1.5.x). There used to be horizontal scroll bars here.

really? i don't remember horizontal scrollbars! i'll take your word for it.

http://www.cdrlabs.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?t=19686

They aren't there in Opera or IE at work either. I'll try to shorten the lines tonight- so that they don't wrap in 768x1024.

G

by **dodecahedron** on Mon Feb 06, 2006 4:37 am

OK, OK. my memory isn't what it used to by.
cfitz would be doing tsk tsk tsk now if he read this topic. :wink:

thanks for the updates G.

by **Muchin** on Thu Feb 09, 2006 2:49 am

MediumRare wrote: A peculiarity: the discs burned by the NEC did better in the climatic tests than those from the BenQ DW1650. Just what this means remains to be seen.

How large is the difference? Do they have some details?

Thank you a lot for providing so much of the greatly valuable information.

by **frank1** on Fri Feb 10, 2006 6:00 am

MediumRare wrote:Plextor PX-755A
. . .
The writing quality is not good with this FW

i.e. FW 1.01
We have now firmware 1.02 for the PX-755

The BenQ 1650 and Nec 4551 (1.07) have more evolved firmwares

by **MediumRare** on Fri Feb 10, 2006 6:32 pm

Muchin wrote:
MediumRare wrote: A peculiarity: the discs burned by the NEC did better in the climatic tests than those from the BenQ DW1650. Just what this means remains to be seen.

How large is the difference? Do they have some details?

They didn't post many details- just 2 before/after values for max. PI Sum 8 per disc type. Since these are determined on the Almedio AEC-1000 (and not AudioDev), the numbers aren't fully compatible with those in the tables I posted.

I'm infering that the remark applies to the Fuji Labelflash (Ritek F1). Here the best disc goes down from 95 to 43 and the other disc goes up from 29 to 260. The starting values suggest that these are the samples from the NEC and BenQ 1650 respectively.

As far as I can tell, the statement is based on these numbers. There are some other cases where one of the two samples holds up significantly better than the other in the climate test, but the drives used are not listed in the table.

I'll check if the author will supply some more information, but am not that hopeful.

G

by **Muchin** on Sat Feb 11, 2006 4:21 am

Thank you for your detailed explanation, MediumRare.

I'm infering that the remark applies to the Fuji Labelflash (Ritek F1). Here the best disc goes down from 95 to 43 and the other disc goes up from 29 to 260. The starting values suggest that these are the samples from the NEC and BenQ 1650 respectively.

Does it mean that the rating for one of the disc in climate stability is ++, and the other is ––?

by **Scour** on Mon Apr 03, 2006 12:38 pm

Hello!

I heard rumors that in c´t 8/2006 is a new test of some writers like LG GSA-H20L, Pioneer DVR-111, Plextor PX760A and Samsung SH-W163.

MediumRare, i hope you working on it

by **MediumRare** on Mon Apr 03, 2006 1:14 pm

Scour wrote:Hello!

I heard rumors that in c´t 8/2006 is a new test of some writers like LG GSA-H20L, Pioneer DVR-111, Plextor PX760A and Samsung SH-W163.

MediumRare, i hope you working on it

Yes and yes. They tested precisely those 4 drives, and yes, I'm working on a summary. I'll be at least a couple of hours because I'm just installing Linux on my main machine.

(And I was busy with a display tool for KProbe test results).

G

by **MediumRare** on Mon Apr 03, 2006 4:49 pm

So as Scour mentioned, c't has another test of DVD-Burners in the latest issue of c't No. 8/2006 on sale noe in Europe. This is only a summary of the test- primarily re. writing quality. There are many more detailed results in the magazine (transfer rates, reading performance, error correction and handling of copy protected CDs).

There are no new media types and only 4 burners in this round. Also, the number of media types tested with the Audiodev CATS-DVD-PRO was limited. Some additional types were evaluated with their in-house Almedio AEC-1000 and with a Plextor PX-716A (CD-Rs) and indicated as a quality index and grade, but without the detailed information from CATS.

The first table contains model and firmware and the c't grade for various categories. The quality and speed ratings for DVDs are combined in a single grade.

Code: Select all: DVD Burns CD Reading Noise Model + Firmware R / RW / DL Burns CD / DVD CD/VideoDVD LG 1.00 0 / - / -- ++ + / 0 0 /0-- GSA-H20L Pioneer 1.02 0 / 0 / + ++ 0 / 0 0 / + DVR-111 Plextor 1.00 0 / - / - ++ 0 / + 0 / -- PX-760A Samsung TS01 0 / - / - ++ 0 / + + / - SH-W163

The next table contains the actual and recommended burning speed for these drives and selected media. The recommended speed is based on details of the CATS scans. The second line shows the c't quality index and grade (# means POFs occurred).

It wasn't indicated this time if a burning cascade was carried out for RW's (a CD-Speed data disk is used for the +-R and CD results).

Code: Select all: DVD+R 16x DVD+R 16x DVD-R 16x DVD+RDL 8x DVD+RW 8x Verbatim Taiyo Yuden Taiyo Yuden Verbatim Ricoh MCC 004 YUDEN00 T03 TYG03 MKM 003 RICOHJPN W21 (000) (000) (001) Model LG 16 / 8 16 / 12 16 / 16 8 / 4 8 / 4 GSA-H20L -287 / --# 40 / 0 61 / + -12 / -- -55 / -- Pioneer 16 / 16 16 / 12 16 / 12 8 / 8 8 / 2.4 DVR-111 61 / + 54 / + -73 / -- 60 / + -259 / --# Plextor 18 / 12 18 / 16 18 / 18 10 / 8 8 / 4 PX-760A -273 / --# 23 / - 54 / + 16 / - -341 / --# Samsung 16 / 16 16 / 16 16 / 16 8 / 6 8 / 4 SH-W163 32 / 0 53 / + 35 / 0 26 / 0 -399 / --#

The next table contains the quality index and grade from the (less detailed) Almedio/Plextor test.

Code: Select all: DVD-R 16x DVD-RDL 4x DVD-RW 6x CD-R 486x Maxell Verbatim MCC Verbatim MCC Taiyo Yuden Model LG 59 / + -6 / -- 31 / 0 81 / ++ GSA-H20L Pioneer -265 / -- 49 / 0 83 / ++ 77 / ++ DVR-111 Plextor 37 / 0 25 / 0 24 / - 82 / ++ PX-760A Samsung -482 / -- -268 / -- 26 / 0 78 / ++ SH-W163

These drives have some special features:
- the Plextor PX-760A burns single layer media @18x, but only gains 2-3 seconds in comparison to LG or Samsung, and then only with selected media (TYG03). But the numbers "look better" and more companies (e.g. LiteOn) will follow. The drive has problems with RWs.
- the Samsung drive has a SATA-interface (native, not bridge chip) and performs pretty well the same as its's IDE sibling SH-W162. SATA will become increasingly important as more mainboards discontinue the IDE interface.
- Pioneer (111, not 111D) and LG can write DVD-RAM @5x
- Pioneer is also capable of Labelflash, but hasn't activated it yet in this firmware (licence not yet finalized). Quality is good for DL and better with SL than the 110, but it still has some problems @16x.
- LG does better at 16x than previous models, but has problems with DL.
- all burned TY CDs with good quality
- None of the drives did well with Ricoh 8x +RW.

G

by **Scour** on Mon Apr 03, 2006 6:39 pm

Hello!

Thanks for your work, MediumRare =D>

by **dolphinius_rex** on Mon Apr 03, 2006 7:24 pm

I'm with Scour, Thanks MediumRare!!

It looks like the PX-760 is a waste of time... all the cool features like 18x recording are flawed at best, and useless at worst. The PX-755 is probably a better choice for Plextor. The DVR-111 might have some hope, but I'm still skeptical about its' overall media support. The Samsung drive was surprisingly fast!!

by **MediumRare** on Mon Mar 05, 2007 5:48 pm

This isn't exactly burners- but the latest isssue of c't (No. 6/2007) has a test of Inkjet printable DVD's. What they test is the printing properties: things like smear resistance, fading, colour fidelity and printable area, not the media burning quality.

They checked 20 media types with 3 printers (Canon iP5200R, Epson R265 and HP Photosmart D5160).

Personally, I use primarily printable media, but base my choices on the burning properties, not on what they tested here. If there's strong interest, I'll try and post a summary later this week though.

G

C't test results. burners.

Re: test in c't 24/2005

Re: test in c't 24/2005

more tests in c't No. 4 / 2006

Re: more tests in c't No. 4 / 2006

Re: more tests in c't No. 4 / 2006

Re: more tests in c't No. 4 / 2006

Re: more tests in c't No. 4 / 2006

c't DVD-burner tests in issue 8/2006

Who is online