Jump to content

Taiyo Yuden 8X vs 16X


ustishrike

Recommended Posts

I have a Samsung SH-S203B SATA drive and I use Imgburn exclusively for my burns. Are the TY 16X better than the 8X with this drive? How do I use the diagnostic tools to check my burns and what are the most important things to look for when evaluating which is a better burn. Thanks for any help .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I ran the PIPO scan on an already burned disc. Is that the right one? The quality rating said 99.0%. Is that good? I couldn't make much of the graphs. And it did not test for jitter. Thanks for your help, BTW.

Edited by ustishrike
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm assuming that my drive does not support the jitter function? So I should strive for for a better percentage, since you described the result as "fairly" accurate? I'll post a snapshot in a few. I do have Nero too, should I try DiscSpeed?

Edited by ustishrike
Link to comment
Share on other sites

CD Speed won't do a quality scan at all with my drive and I just flashed it. The firmware update was very recent too. I like the drive, but.... Oh well, maybe the next update will address it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

its not the programme that has a problem showing jitter, its your drive, scanners that show jitter are ones such as benq 1640 and 1655 and some of the newer lite-on drives, i am not sure of those lite-on model numbers that can, maybe one of the other members knows.

dvdinfopro and cd speed are about the best there is for scanning

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's what I was figuring, Cornholio, but I thought I'd ask. I'm thinking, like you mentioned, that the quality rating isn't as accurate without the jitter evaluation. Could a future drive firmware update address this sort of thing, do you think?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've found out something interesting. Slower is not necessarily better. I burned identical data on TY 16X discs (T03) at 4X and 8X. As you'll see below, the 8X is a significantly better burn than the 4X. I'll pick up some TY 8X discs (T02) and make the same comparison and we'll have the answer to the title of this thread.

 

OOPS! the attachments didn't work. I saved them as DIPX files instead of PNG files and they didn't insert properly. I'll post the graphs very soon. Sorry.

Edited by ustishrike
Link to comment
Share on other sites

With DVDInfoPro - scan at 4x and if you use the Nero DiscSpeed - scan at 8x. This is for all type of DVD discs.

 

Scanning with Samsung + Nec/Optiarc (non Lite-On based Optiarcs) - usually gives a little bit to good result. But as long as you don't compare apples with bananas and just compare your own burnings at various write speeds - it should give you a clue on which ones (write speed) is the optimal for the burned discs. Don't forget to try 6x - it's very often a "forgotten" speed, that can give very good results.

 

I doubt that jitter scanning will be possible will your current burner. It's something with the chipset that needs to be the right one for allowing that.

 

If I'm not totally wrong - all the later models of Lite-Ons (the iHAP/iHAS models) - support jitter scanning. Also some older models - like my own DH-20A3H.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi,

 

You asked several times if 99% is a good result and logically it could only be better if you got 100% but as Cynthia has alluded to, the real question is how reliable are the results from your Samsung.

 

You can find more information on quality scanning and also how to use CD/DVD Speed with your Samsung in the following post if you're interested....

http://club.cdfreaks.com/f105/mini-faq-sam...07/#post1803665

 

".... Some drives give good results (comparable to other well-known scanning drives), some others are questionable. So take the scans with a grain of salt unless you were able to verify them with another drive like a Liteon or Benq DVDRW."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.