Write Quality Tests MCC 02RG20

The MCC 02RG20 media is the 8X Mitsubishi DVD-R media with which we benchmarked all of our drives.

PO Errors in MCC 02RG20 8X DVD-R media

We still haven't encountered any errors that will render this media unreadable. Let's take a look at Q-Tool's results for the less problematic, yet plentiful, PI errors.

PI Errors in MCC 02RG20 8X DVD-R media

Though PI errors are not as irreparable as PO errors, the amount read on each of these discs says a lot about how the drives wrote to them. The DRU-710A had the most trouble writing to the -R media out of all of the drives that could. Also, PI errors increased as the write continued to the end of the disc, which we suspect was caused by the media being warped.

The screenshot below shows a scan of the media from the DRU-710A by Q-Tools. Again, the PI errors are in blue and it is obvious that the bulk of them reside in the second half of the disc, increasing as it reaches the end.



Another screenshot shows results from a Q-Tools scan of a 02RG20 disc written by the SOHW-1633S. Though the media did not have as many PI errors as the disc from the Sony drive, the same pattern showed up with errors increasing towards the end of the disc.



Write Quality Tests MCC 004 Write Quality Tests MKM 001
Comments Locked

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 DL
    2) 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

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now