Difference between various Lite-On writers

[MikeTR]

I got asked this question myself yesterday and did not quite know the answer. Maybe anyone here knows more details. All I know/ think is this:

40125S: mediatek 5 chip; 40x
40125W: idem
48125S: mediatek 5 chip; 48x
48125W: idem
48126W: mediatek 6 chip; 48x
48246S: mediatek 6 chip; 48x and 24xRW
52246S: mediatek 6 chip; 52x

Is it true that the S/W versions do not differ other than in designation?
Is the writing strategy the same for the various 48x drives (CAV/CLV)?
How about the difference in RW speed/strategy from 12x to 24x?

I am honestly lost here.

Edit: Ok, the difference in RW speed is because of the change from CLV to CAV. Should have seen that one earlier. Is that all there is to it?

[dhc014]

I have heard that the difference between S & W drives is the memory used. I know nothing more.

[Halc]

I'm interested in this question as well.

I can get 48246S locally for 66 euros, but not the 52246S model.

I KNOW I can just upgrade the firmware, but I'm not interested in just doing that.

What I want to be able to achieve is the almost faultless C2 reading capability of 52246S (which 48246S does not have).

So, my question is:

Do 48246S and 52246S have exact same hardware (NOT just chipset, but pickup, PCB revision, etc)?

Can 48246S be upgraded to 52246S so that it gives the C2 reading performance of the latter, while retaining the superior writing performance (lower C1 count) of the former?

I repeat: I KNOW I can just flash the firmware, what I want to know if and how this affect writing quality (not speed) and C2 reading capabilities.

Anyone?

regards,
Halcyon

PS No, I'm not jumping ship from Yamaha/Plextor to LiteOn, but I need an accurate C2 capable drive that works with WSES or CD Doctor and the LiteOn LTR-52246S looks to be the best possible C2 reader on the market today (?)

[Albinoni]

The Liteon 52246S is a Liteon 48246S. Both of these machines are identical to one another inside and outside. What Liteon did was took the 48246S, flashed its firmware, made it slightly faster (beleive me the speed between a 48246S and a 52246S is peanuts, and to my own opinion not worth to flash the firmware) to that of the 48246S. I was also told that both drives share the identical hardware inside, mechanism, laser, chipsets etc etc.

Why Liteon bought out a 52246S I really dont know, but to me it wasn't worth the effort and cost, when the 48246S is on the same level, and plus you can flash the firmware of a 48246S to become a 52246S. Liteon should of say bought out a 58x burner instead.

[cfitz]

What I want to be able to achieve is the almost faultless C2 reading capability of 52246S (which 48246S does not have).
<snip>
Can 48246S be upgraded to 52246S so that it gives the C2 reading performance of the latter, while retaining the superior writing performance (lower C1 count) of the former?

What do you mean by faultless C2 reading, and why do you say the 52246S has it but the 48246S doesn't? Also, why do you say the 48246S has (inherently??) superior writing performance? Can you supply references to where you got your information?

cfitz

[Dartman]

If I use good media the writing and reading of my 52 is better then any of the other Liteons I have or had so I'd say buy the one and upgrade it. If you don't like the results downgrade it again.
I haven't had the 48x24x48 so I don't know for sure if it's better at writing or not. My 48x12x48 was good at writing but just so so at reading till they came out with the latest firmware, then the reading improved a lot.

[dodecahedron]

The Liteon 52246S is a Liteon 48246S. Both of these machines are identical to one another inside and outside. What Liteon did was took the 48246S, flashed its firmware, made it slightly faster (beleive me the speed between a 48246S and a 52246S is peanuts, and to my own opinion not worth to flash the firmware) to that of the 48246S. I was also told that both drives share the identical hardware inside, mechanism, laser, chipsets etc etc.

yeah yeah, this has been said many times.
as far as i know, everyone who says this assumes this is true. becuase of the similar specs, performance, and firmware interchangeablitiy.

so far no one has given any concrete proof.
i'd like to see someone dismantling two such drives and comparing the actual hardware, rather than repeat the unsubstantiated rumors.

@Halc:
yeah, what cfitz said. can you clarify?

[Halc]

I think I have made a mistake in the C2 error reading capability between the two.

I thought I had seen the performance difference in the CDR-Info Writing Quality article:

ftp://64.124.173.56/Writing_Quality_13_1_2003.exe

BUT, it was between: 48125W and 52246S (p. 105 of the above article). And even that difference in C2 accuracy could be just down to statistics (I think only one test reading per drive was performed to produce those results).

So, in fact I cannot know for sure how the 48246S C2 reading performance is compared to the 52246S on the hardware side.

And, I still don't have conclusive proof that just the firmware between the two are different.

Also, while trying to find again the pages on which I think I saw a proof of the better media compatibility when writing (less C1 on various media) of 48246S, I stumbled onto this:

http://club.cdfreaks.com/showthread.php ... AND+errors

Then I tried to find the information which compared the above two drives in writing quality, but couldn't. I was sure I had seen it somewhere, but can't find it anymore.

CDFreaks has only tested 52246S whereas CDRLabs has only tested 48125W.

CDR-Info has tested SONY CRX220E1 (firmware upgraded CRX215E1, which is a LiteON OEM AFAIK) and they've found out it's C2 reading capability to be very high:

http://www.cdrinfo.com/Sections/Article ... =0&index=3

CDR-Info has not tested any LiteOn 48x or 52x models with the original (non-overclocked firmware).

Then again the high C2 accuracy may not be of use, if the optical mechanism and servo quality isn't very good:

http://www.cdrinfo.com/Sections/Article ... =0&index=5

So I don't know really what to do... What I would like to find (in the perfect world) is:

1) best optical pickup performance (avoids as many read errors as possible through superior reading)

2) best C2 reporting and correction performance (reports all errors it faces and errors it cannot correct).

Speed is really of very little importance to me, as long as DA reading speed does not fall a lot below 0.5x. I want accuracy, accuracy, repeatability, reliability, accuracy and NOT just speed.

I'm not convinced that 52246S (and perhaps 48246S) fulfill but the second of these requirements.

My apologogies if I've taken this a bit off-thread, but this is the reason why I wanted to identify the possible hardware differences between 48246S and 52246S.

I welcome any comments and corrections.

regards,
Halc

PS To repeat again, for those new to this thread: I'm not interested in overclocking 48246S to 52246S, I want to know if they contain the same hardware and if 48246S is at least as good in C2 accuracy as 52246S is. Or more generally, which drive is the most accurate in reading scratched discs, reporting back found C2 errors and correcting them.

[cfitz]

Thanks for the links, Halc. I have a Memorex 48MAXX (rebadged LTR-48246S) and would like to help, but don't want to take it apart to take pictures of the internal components. Sorry.

cfitz