Hopefully they can resolve the following:
"Questionable writing quality with some common DVD±R media"
with future firmware upgrades.
Other than that, the only "issue" would appear to be speed as compared to some competing 16X burners; if it comes down to a choice between quality and speed, however, I will always pick quality, as I think most of us would.
VEFF wrote:Might I suggest modifying the DL-related pro:
"Writes to DVD+R9 DL media at 2.4x"
"Writes to DVD+R9 DL media at 2.4x (4X with free future fw upgrade)".
since this speed increase is a big plus IMO.
Even more exciting is the fact that BenQ has announced that they will be releasing a new firmware which will increase the drive's maximum writing speed for DVD+R9 media from 2.4x to 4x, at no extra charge! Another promised feature in the upcoming firmware is support for PI/PIF scanning through the popular tool DVDInfoPro, at testing speeds of up to 8x.
rated at 48x, and some The results are below.
Ian wrote:VEFF wrote:Very nice Ian!
Thanks, but I didn't write it.
MediumRare wrote:That was one exhaustive review! Well done, DD. (It took a while to load the 6+ MiB on a dial-up line, though ).
I have one suggestion- while looking at the BLER scans, I kept scrolling back to the media tables to check the actual burning speed. Would it be possible to add the max. available speed to the captions under the KProbe scans? Example: Imation 8x DVD+R @ 16x
MediumRare wrote:Looks like this is not the drive to use for writing/testing CD's. Although I'll hang on to my LiteOn LTR 48246S as long as it runs (it started out as "just a cheap drive" and has turned out to be a jewel), a lot of people will ditch their CD-burners when they get a DVD drive. The limited speed (16x for 74 min. discs ) and missing C2-reporting are big drawbacks in my books. Furthermore, I don't really understand why 48x reading isn't available on a drive that handles DVD's at 16x. Mechanical and optical requirements are less severe for CD's.
MediumRare wrote:From the actual burning times, its seems that the drive doesn't like CMC DVD-R's and, to a lesser extents, DAXON (=Acer Media!!) DVD+R's.
MediumRare wrote:A couple of editorial/typographic problems:
- BIOS is Phoenix, not Pheonix
- There seems to be part of a sentence missing prior to the CD writing speed table:rated at 48x, and some The results are below.
aviationwiz wrote:Nice job Dolph!
Does anyone else think that much media testing is just slightly obssesive?
pchilson wrote:Nice review dolphinius_rex,
I'm glad to see you like the BenQ...
I like all the media tests, gives a more robust feel for what the drive can do.
dolphinius_rex wrote:I have to admit a little frustration however, as I had to constantly test and re-test media as firmwares started droping in every week or two!
Ian wrote:It would be nice if BenQ sent the firmware out to testers instead of letting NicW leak it to the usual people. Oh well..
Darth wrote:any differences between 1600@1620 and the real deal 1620?
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests
|All Content is Copyright (c) 2001-2016 CDRLabs Inc.|