Page 1 of 1

LG GSA-H22N

PostPosted: Fri Sep 29, 2006 10:48 pm
by Grain
I 18:16:21 ImgBurn Version 2.1.0.0 started!
I 18:16:21 Microsoft Windows XP Home Edition (5.1, Build 2600 : Service Pack 2)
I 18:16:21 Initialising SPTI...
I 18:16:21 Searching for SCSI / ATAPI devices...
I 18:16:22 Found 2 DVD±RWs and 2 DVD±RW/RAMs!
I 18:17:43 Operation Started!
I 18:17:43 Source File: -==/\/[DISCOVERY IMAGE]\/\==-
I 18:17:43 Source File Sectors: 2,297,888 (MODE1/2048)
I 18:17:43 Source File Size: 4,706,074,624 bytes
I 18:17:43 Source File Volume Identifier: DISCOVERY_IMAGE
I 18:17:43 Source File File System(s): None
I 18:17:43 Destination Device: [1:0:0] HL-DT-ST DVD-RAM GSA-H22N 1.00 (F) (ATA)
I 18:17:43 Destination Media Type: DVD-R (Disc ID: MCC 03RG20) (Speeds: 4x, 8x, 12x, 16x, 18x)
I 18:17:43 Destination Media Sectors: 2,297,888
I 18:17:43 Write Mode: DVD
I 18:17:43 Write Type: DAO
I 18:17:43 Write Speed: MAX
I 18:17:43 Link Size: Auto
I 18:17:43 Test Mode: No
I 18:17:43 BURN-Proof: Enabled
I 18:17:43 Filling Buffer...
I 18:17:44 Writing LeadIn...
I 18:18:01 Writing Image...
I 18:22:28 Synchronising Cache...
I 18:22:46 Exporting Graph Data...
I 18:22:46 Graph Data File: C:\DVDInfoPro Scans\HL-DT-ST_DVD-RAM_GSA-H22N_1.00_9-29-2006_MCC_03RG20_MAX_DISCOVERY_IMAGE.ibg
I 18:22:46 Export Successfully Completed!
I 18:22:46 Operation Successfully Completed! - Duration: 00:05:03
I 18:22:46 Average Write Rate: 17,277 KB/s (12.5x) - Maximum Write Rate: 25,179 KB/s (18.2x)
I 18:22:46 Cycling Tray before Verify...
W 18:22:57 Waiting for device to become ready...
I 18:23:17 Device Ready!
I 18:23:17 Operation Started!
I 18:23:17 Source Device: [1:0:0] HL-DT-ST DVD-RAM GSA-H22N 1.00 (F) (ATA)
I 18:23:17 Source Media Type: DVD-R (Book Type: DVD-R) (Disc ID: MCC 03RG20) (Speeds: 4x, 8x, 12x, 16x, 18x)
I 18:23:17 Image File: -==/\/[DISCOVERY IMAGE]\/\==-
I 18:23:17 Image File Sectors: 2,297,888 (MODE1/2048)
I 18:23:17 Image File Size: 4,706,074,624 bytes
I 18:23:17 Image File Volume Identifier: DISCOVERY_IMAGE
I 18:23:17 Image File File System(s): None
I 18:23:18 Verifying Sectors...
I 18:28:27 Exporting Graph Data...
I 18:28:27 Graph Data File: C:\DVDInfoPro Scans\HL-DT-ST_DVD-RAM_GSA-H22N_1.00_9-29-2006_MCC_03RG20_MAX_DISCOVERY_IMAGE.ibg
I 18:28:27 Export Successfully Completed!
I 18:28:27 Operation Successfully Completed! - Duration: 00:05:02
I 18:28:27 Average Verify Rate: 15,217 KB/s (11.0x) - Maximum Verify Rate: 22,230 KB/s (16.1x)


Looks like an interesting drive re quality so far.

PostPosted: Fri Sep 29, 2006 10:51 pm
by Grain
Alright, that's confusing. When previewing the post, it showed my attachments as in reverse order to which I attached. So I deleted and put in reverse order. Now when posting it reversed the order shown in the preview :o Anyway, obviously the last two attachments match the log.

PostPosted: Fri Sep 29, 2006 10:53 pm
by Ian
Yeah, the images should show up in the order you add them. I didn't know that about the preview though. I bet that's a bug in the module.

PostPosted: Sat Sep 30, 2006 3:25 am
by dodecahedron
no bug.
the way it orignally worked is that when attaching them/when previewing you see that attachment boxes in the reverse order and when you actually posted they were in the reverse order.
i asked and Socheat fixed it so that when it's actually displayed (after posting) the order is 'correct'. but the order when attaching is still reversed.

PostPosted: Sat Sep 30, 2006 8:20 am
by Ian
Yes, but he's saying that when he previews the post, the pictures are in the wrong order but correct when actually making the post. It should be the same in both cases.

PostPosted: Sat Sep 30, 2006 9:03 am
by dodecahedron
i agree, it would be nicer that way.

just be aware that when previewing you don't actually see the pics, you just see the 'Add an Attachment' boxes below the regular text box. and they are indeed in the reverse order.

PostPosted: Sun Oct 01, 2006 11:15 am
by Grain
It seems to like the media I like.

PostPosted: Mon Oct 02, 2006 11:15 am
by dodecahedron
here is a link @ cdfreaks about this drive with lots of scans
http://club.cdfreaks.com/showthread.php?t=191607

PostPosted: Mon Oct 02, 2006 4:48 pm
by Spazmogen
Its only $38.34 CDN right now!

At Directcanada.com. Link above.

PostPosted: Mon Oct 02, 2006 9:06 pm
by [buck]
Wow, this drive seems much more BenQ friendly than its predecessor. Is the chipset different from the H10 drives?

PostPosted: Mon Oct 02, 2006 9:10 pm
by Ian
My drive should show up on Wednesday. I can't wait.

PostPosted: Mon Oct 02, 2006 9:10 pm
by ala42
The H1x drives use Renesas, the H2x drives Panasonic chipsets.

PostPosted: Mon Oct 02, 2006 9:31 pm
by [buck]
ala42 wrote:The H1x drives use Renesas, the H2x drives Panasonic chipsets.

Interesting. I'll definately be keeping my eye on this drive; it looks pretty promising :D

PostPosted: Tue Oct 03, 2006 11:15 am
by Grain
Still looking solid on good media.

PostPosted: Fri Oct 06, 2006 1:05 am
by hoxlund
our best buy in cedar rapids just got this guy in stock

i think the price was $80

PostPosted: Sun Oct 08, 2006 2:41 pm
by Justin42
It's on sale for $59.99 this week. I just picked one up using the 12% reward zone coupons that went out (Since $59 was still a bit higher than I would've liked to have paid). The scans I've seen everywhere have looked really good.

Anyone have any opinions of this drive vs. the H10L? I already have an H10L and my secondary computer has a rapidly aging 4163 in it (that still burns fine but seems to have trouble on newer media, like TTH02). Plus I've been enjoying messing around with Lightscribe... I'm not sure if I should swap the H10L to my secondary machine and make the H22L my primary burner, or if they're pretty much equivalent and I should just put the H22L in my secondary machine and save the hassle of a swap.

Speed doesn't matter to me (i.e., I don't need 18x burning capability)... only quality of burns. I am thinking the H10L is about equal in overall burn quality (depending on the media, of course)...?

PostPosted: Mon Oct 09, 2006 3:58 pm
by dodecahedron
Justin42 wrote:I am thinking the H10L is about equal in overall burn quality (depending on the media, of course)...?
i would say yes.