PC World Magazine's Top 10 CD-RW Drives

by **BuddhaTB** on Sat Dec 28, 2002 1:09 am

1. TDK VeloCD 48x24x48 (Ricoh Drive)
2. LG Electronics GCE-8480B 48x16x48
3. Memorex 48x12x48 (Lite-On Drive)
4. Pacific Digital Mach48 48x12x48 (Lite-On Drive)
5. CenDyne Lightning IV 48x12x48 (Lite-On Drive)
6. Asus CRW-4012A 40x12x48
7. Sony CRX210A1 48x12x48 (Lite-On Drive)
8. Plextor PlexWriter 48x24x48A
9. Samsung SW-240 40x12x40
10. LG Electronics GCC-4320B 32x10x40x16 CD-RW/DVD Combo Drive

Wierd, the TDK VeloCD 48x Drive PC World tested was based on a Ricoh drive using Just Link Buffer Underrun Protection and doesn't support Mt. Rainer like the Lite-On version does. This is a complete shock to me, as I thought all TDK 48x drives were made by Lite-On.
TDK VeloCD 48x Specs

PC World's Top 10 CD-RW List For Jan. 2003 Issue
http://www.pcworld.com/reviews/article/ ... 321,00.asp

by **Ian** on Sat Dec 28, 2002 1:25 am

BuddhaTB wrote:
Wierd, the TDK VeloCD 48x Drive PC World tested was based on a Ricoh drive using Just Link Buffer Underrun Protection and doesn't support Mt. Rainer like the Lite-On version does. This is a complete shock to me, as I thought all TDK 48x drives were made by Lite-On.
TDK VeloCD 48x Specs

Yeah, thats very weird. Maybe its a typo.

It amazes me how two drives based on the same Lite-On design can peform differently. The Memorex has "Fine perfomance and a great price" while the Pacific Digital's "CD-ROM read performance lags behind that of the fastest drives." Go figure...

by **coolestnitish** on Sat Dec 28, 2002 1:51 am

I think they don't want people to know that so many of these drives are made by LiteOn because then people would stop buying them and all go for the cheapest one not worrying whether Pacific Digital is better or Memorex.

by **vinnie97** on Sat Dec 28, 2002 3:46 am

yep, 'tis a conspiracy. :roll:

I think it may come down to slight manufacturing differences or OEM firmware.

by **eliminator** on Sat Dec 28, 2002 3:49 am

I stopped buying PC World & PC Magazine long time ago :roll:

by **Alexandrus** on Sat Dec 28, 2002 12:32 pm

And for a good reason I bet. Those magazines, along with CHIP Magazine(if you live in Europe) are pure garbage. Most of the time the editors have no idea about the products they review.
Most hardware printed magazines are that way, trust me, I used to work for one and I quit because of that reason(oh yeah, and because I didn't get payed on time

).

by **Raz0rX** on Sat Dec 28, 2002 12:35 pm

You should also see Maximum PC. For most of the time, they only recommend Plextor burner even though the price is so expensive. They did review a Liteon drive once or twice but that's it.

by **Alexandrus** on Sat Dec 28, 2002 12:37 pm

BuddhaTB wrote:1. TDK VeloCD 48x24x48 (Ricoh Drive)
2. LG Electronics GCE-8480B 48x16x48
3. Memorex 48x12x48 (Lite-On Drive)
4. Pacific Digital Mach48 48x12x48 (Lite-On Drive)
5. CenDyne Lightning IV 48x12x48 (Lite-On Drive)
6. Asus CRW-4012A 40x12x48
7. Sony CRX210A1 48x12x48 (Lite-On Drive)
8. Plextor PlexWriter 48x24x48A
9. Samsung SW-240 40x12x40
10. LG Electronics GCC-4320B 32x10x40x16 CD-RW/DVD Combo Drive

Wierd, the TDK VeloCD 48x Drive PC World tested was based on a Ricoh drive using Just Link Buffer Underrun Protection and doesn't support Mt. Rainer like the Lite-On version does. This is a complete shock to me, as I thought all TDK 48x drives were made by Lite-On.
TDK VeloCD 48x Specs

PC World's Top 10 CD-RW List For Jan. 2003 Issue
http://www.pcworld.com/reviews/article/ ... 321,00.asp

I don't think RICOH makes any 48x burners, let alone sell it as OEM to other companies such as TDK. They take great pride in their brand.

As for the top10, it's crap, excuse me but it is. How can a 40/12/48 unit outperform or be better in any way than the Plextor 48/24/48 or the SONY 48/12/48 LITE-ON based ?
I mean, aren't all LITE-ON drives the same no matter who sells them ?

by **Ian** on Sat Dec 28, 2002 1:02 pm

Alexandrus wrote:As for the top10, it's crap, excuse me but it is. How can a 40/12/48 unit outperform or be better in any way than the Plextor 48/24/48 or the SONY 48/12/48 LITE-ON based ?
I mean, aren't all LITE-ON drives the same no matter who sells them ?

I agree. I think they base it on more than performance and features. It seems like they put a lot of weight on tech support. That's important, but most people don't really consider that when buying a drive.

by **M17** on Sat Dec 28, 2002 1:06 pm

I was looking at that list the other day as well.
The ratings are NOT based purely on performence.
35% performance,
25% price
20% features
10% tech support policies
10% ease of installation

Well its a good thing that liteon based drives are on the top.
But the alarming thing is that CenDyne 48x12x48x that was tested was probably a liteon. As we all know it is very hard to find a liteon drive in a Cendyne box. Newbies wanting to buy a no. 5 drive on the market get the optorite or aopen, and those drives just don't measure up to liteon. Its very misleading for PC World to not even mention that Cendyne ships different drives in a same box. All are not the same.
M17

by **Alexandrus** on Sat Dec 28, 2002 1:06 pm

Even so, the tech support differs from are to area.
Try getting tech support from ASUS if you live in Eastern Europe, and good luck with that because you'll most likely get to have grand children before ASUS replies

by **M17** on Sat Dec 28, 2002 1:09 pm

The PC World magazine that I get is us version. I assume that tech support policies are those appling to the us only.

by **coolestnitish** on Sat Dec 28, 2002 2:11 pm

Assuming that the TDK they reviewed is also a LiteOn, then 5 out of those 10 drives are LiteOn made :lol:

. That's great news for LiteOn.

by **Harrier** on Sat Dec 28, 2002 4:34 pm

It's obviously BRIBED.

by **coolestnitish** on Sat Dec 28, 2002 4:58 pm

You mean it's bribed by LiteOn so that 5 of these drives are made by them?

by **BuddhaTB** on Sat Dec 28, 2002 5:23 pm

Harrier wrote:It's obviously BRIBED.

Its not bribed. Lite-On really does make good products. Just look at any of Ian's reviews for a Lite-On product and you'll see it gets good marks.

by **Burn2death** on Sun Dec 29, 2002 10:27 pm

Don't pay any attention to those PC World Mag ratings, it's pure GARBAGE, the only explain I can come up with how they rate the products is that the ratings are auction off, the more you paid them the higher you get rated, for example I saw a few ratings where the same Cendyne drive based on the Liteon drive that is $50 more expensive but is being rated 3 spots higher than the Liteon drive same with all the TDK drives, I think this is how the rating system is over there,
$$$$>few seconds faster= high rating
No $$$$ paid= low rating
there's no other explainations, if you really want a good honest review that is based on performance and quality of the drive? CDRLabs.com and a few other website would be your best bet, keep up the good work Ian.

by **dhc014** on Sun Dec 29, 2002 11:03 pm

MaximumPC's top drive was number 8 on that list: Plextor PlexWriter 48x24x48A

by **Ian** on Sun Dec 29, 2002 11:37 pm

dhc014 wrote:MaximumPC's top drive was number 8 on that list: Plextor PlexWriter 48x24x48A

Not surprising. MaxPC loves anything with the Plextor name on it.

by **eliminator** on Sun Dec 29, 2002 11:53 pm

Yep - I wonder why.... :roll:

by **coolestnitish** on Mon Dec 30, 2002 1:33 am

Eliminator is back again!! :lol:

He goes in stealth mode for some time and then all of a sudden appears. lol.

by **VEFF** on Mon Dec 30, 2002 11:26 am

Ian wrote:
BuddhaTB wrote:
Wierd, the TDK VeloCD 48x Drive PC World tested was based on a Ricoh drive using Just Link Buffer Underrun Protection and doesn't support Mt. Rainer like the Lite-On version does. This is a complete shock to me, as I thought all TDK 48x drives were made by Lite-On.
TDK VeloCD 48x Specs

Yeah, thats very weird. Maybe its a typo.

It amazes me how two drives based on the same Lite-On design can peform differently. The Memorex has "Fine perfomance and a great price" while the Pacific Digital's "CD-ROM read performance lags behind that of the fastest drives." Go figure...

Ian, I haven't read the article, but could it be a firmware version issue?

I know you reviewed the LiteOn LTR-48125W and The Visiontek based on it, and you gave the Visiontek a higher rating (9/8/9 and 9 overall)
versus (9/7/8 and 8 overall).
The performance (third figure) was 8 for the LiteON and 9 for the Visiontek, which had the newer firmware.

by **scottm** on Mon Dec 30, 2002 11:30 am

Maximum PC magazine put a 40x LITE-ON in their dream machine (and if I remember right called it component of the year). It was between that and the Yamy F1...Plextor wasn't even mentioned. They even felt the need to rationalize their choice...

by **vinnie97** on Mon Dec 30, 2002 5:16 pm

how 'bout a CDRLABS.COM TOP 10 CD-RW drives special feature, based on overall performance score?

by **eliminator** on Tue Dec 31, 2002 1:37 am

coolestnitish wrote:Eliminator is back again!! He goes in stealth mode for some time and then all of a sudden appears. lol.

StealtH is my middle name

PC World Magazine's Top 10 CD-RW Drives

PC World Magazine's Top 10 CD-RW Drives

Re: PC World Magazine's Top 10 CD-RW Drives

Re: PC World Magazine's Top 10 CD-RW Drives

Re: PC World Magazine's Top 10 CD-RW Drives

?

Re: ?

Re: PC World Magazine's Top 10 CD-RW Drives

Oh contrare...

Who is online