The Test
Our benchmarks include a few tests to show the performance of each of our test drives. We first use Nero CD-DVD Speed to create a data disc, which tests the write capabilities/performance of the drive. We then run a transfer rate test to benchmark the read capabilities as well as verify the data on the disc.Finally, we use our Plextor PX-712A drive to read the media for PI/PO errors. According to the ECMA standard...
A row of an ECC Block that has at least 1 byte in error constitutes a PI error. In any 8 consecutive ECC Blocks the total number of PI errors before correction shall not exceed 280.Now, some writers may create discs with more than 208 PI errors and they are not necessarily unreadable, but they are not the best quality discs around.
A row is 182 bytes long where the last 10 bytes contain PI (Parity Inner) information. An ECC block is 208 rows long where the last 16 rows contain the PO (Parity Outer) information. This gives us a maximum possible PI error amount of 208 errors per block and for 8 blocks after each other this sum is of course 8 times higher giving a maximum possible amount of 1664 PI errors.
If a row of an ECC Block contains more than 5 erroneous bytes, the row is said to be “PI-uncorrectable” or PIF (Parity Inner Failures).
In any ECC Block the number of PI-uncorrectable rows should not exceed 4.
Our test bed:
AMD Athlon 64 3500+ (2.2Ghz)
Giga-byte GA-K8NXP-SLI
NVIDIA 6600GT SLI Edition (single 128MB card)
1GB (512MBx2) Corsair XMS4400
Plextor PX-712A, Firmware v1.07
Microsoft Windows XP SP2
Nero CD-DVD Speed 4.00
PlexTools Professional XL 3.03
Again, we have taken all of your feedback into consideration and have decided to go back to focusing more on the write quality of each media instead of just the write speeds. Our results are displayed on the following pages. The screenshots are again available in a ZIP files corresponding to the type of media.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
30 Comments
View All Comments
n7 - Thursday, August 4, 2005 - link
Moral of the story: The BenQ DW1640 still pwns :)Heck, it's good enough that Plextor (who is really quite a joke nowdays) is using the BenQ drive :)
quanta - Wednesday, August 3, 2005 - link
The Mt.Rainier spec has been around for a while now, and it still doesn't support Mt.Rainier? So much for a manufacturer with 'high end' optical drives. But then again, what do you expect from someone ?http://club.cdfreaks.com/showthread.php?p=1000879#...">suing PxLinux developer with DMCA?Den - Wednesday, August 3, 2005 - link
Why is it that the drive being reviewed is not in most of the error rate graphs? And I think the headings are with the wrong graphs for some of the article too. This is pretty sloppy work even by web standards...Den - Wednesday, August 3, 2005 - link
Just to be more specific, no plextor on the error rate graph for MCC 03RG20 on page 5, or Ritek 008 (DVD+RW) on page 6, or c1 or c2 errors on page 8.semo - Wednesday, August 3, 2005 - link
that sentence does not sound right to me...surely the dw1640 gives more bang for the buck if it is cheaper and since the plextools does not even work with the 740a (because of the dumb rebadging).
shabby - Wednesday, August 3, 2005 - link
I bought the 1640 for $53 cdn, its impossible that it costs even more in the states.LX - Tuesday, August 2, 2005 - link
Since hardware-wise this drive is the same as the BenQ DW1640, it may make more sense to buy the BenQ (cheaper) and flash it with either the latest BenQ or latest Plextor firmware (yes, it works)dmxlite - Tuesday, August 2, 2005 - link
Flashing the 1640 with the 740 firmware works? Cool. I'll keep that in mind, since it looks like the 740 firmware is a bit better in some cases than the 1640's.WooDaddy - Tuesday, August 2, 2005 - link
Ok... I think we've been scammed yall. Dual layer media has been out for prolly 2yrs now and it is still $4-5 a pop. For the same amount of time, single layer has dropped almost 70%. I'm really tired of all these new burners that are expensive to actually use (for dual layer).It's like having a Ferrari for $20k but gas costs $5k a gallon.
andrep74 - Monday, August 8, 2005 - link
Blame all the people that decided to steal DVDs using Netflix or Blockbuster, renting them as fast as they could for $15/mo and ripping the ones they _would_ have bought, burning them to DVD-(+)R instead.In reality the only (obvious?) use for DL-DVD is making exact copies of commercial DVDs, including the menus and extra features that were usually ignored during the above process; now DL carries an extra "tax" to help movie companies recover their "losses".
So, yeah, some assholes won in the short term, but now we _all_ pay for their theft in the long term. Don't think others' actions don't affect you.