CDRInfo Forum CDRInfo Forum

Forums  Register  Login  My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums 

Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ  Ticket List  Log Out

LiteOn SOHC-5232K vs. SA300 - Part 1   Logged in as: Guest
Viewers: 1125 You can click here to see Today's Posts | Most Active Topics | Posts Since Last Visit
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Optical Storage] >> CD, DVD, BD Drives >> Writing Quality >> LiteOn SOHC-5232K vs. SA300 - Part 1 Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
LiteOn SOHC-5232K vs. SA300 - Part 1 - 5/19/2004 4:13:22 PM   
emperor


Posts: 7210
Joined: 4/28/2004
Status: offline
The latest combo drive from LiteOn supporting 52X/32X/52X and 16X DVD reading speed. Again we used Nero CD-DVD Speed v2.97beta...

* Reference Scans





Attachment (2)

< Message edited by emperor -- 5/19/2004 11:14:13 PM >
Post #: 1
RE: LiteOn SOHC-5232K vs. SA300 - Part 1 - 5/19/2004 4:16:42 PM   
emperor


Posts: 7210
Joined: 4/28/2004
Status: offline
* 8X CAV Reading Speed



* 6X CAV Reading Speed



* 4X CAV Reading Speed



Attachment (3)

< Message edited by emperor -- 5/19/2004 11:17:38 PM >

(in reply to emperor)
Post #: 2
RE: LiteOn SOHC-5232K vs. SA300 - Part 1 - 5/20/2004 1:02:36 PM   
Halc

 

Posts: 60
Joined: 2/4/2002
From:
Status: offline
Is the MCC 4x DVD+r @ 4x with BTC 1108IM disc tested here the same disc tested also with SOHD-167T?

If so, then the results are really interesting :)

(in reply to emperor)
Post #: 3
RE: LiteOn SOHC-5232K vs. SA300 - Part 1 - 5/20/2004 1:59:58 PM   
emperor


Posts: 7210
Joined: 4/28/2004
Status: offline
Yes all media are the same at all tests, thats for comparison between the various drives

(in reply to Halc)
Post #: 4
RE: LiteOn SOHC-5232K vs. SA300 - Part 1 - 5/21/2004 9:18:38 AM   
Halc

 

Posts: 60
Joined: 2/4/2002
From:
Status: offline
Now a question arises.

Let's take the "MCC 4x DVD+R @ 4x with BTC" disc scans.

The CATS scans in the SOHD-167 and SOHC-5232K are identical (as they should be). Maybe they are the same result image (from the same CATS scan).

However, the LiteOn DVD-ROM scan has 10x the PI and PO errors compared to the scan results of the CD/DVD-Combo drive. Both using the same test disc at 8x scanning speed.

Looking at the relative results that other readers have gotten for this disc, namely Plextor/Nutech (more inline with LiteOn combo), I'm inclined to make a hypothesis that:

1) LiteON SOHD-167 is a _really_ bad reader (at least for that particular disc)

2) It's reporting just too much errors (i.e. reporting is broken)

Actually the second hypothesis has already been reported on earlier Lite-On dvd-rom models with kProbe.

It seems the problem is carried over to new LiteOn DVD-ROM models and also CD DVD Speed utility.

regards,
halcyon

(in reply to emperor)
Post #: 5
RE: LiteOn SOHC-5232K vs. SA300 - Part 1 - 5/21/2004 11:37:53 AM   
emperor


Posts: 7210
Joined: 4/28/2004
Status: offline
We must test each DVD reader with many DVD media before making safe assumptions, this is planned for the near future...

(in reply to Halc)
Post #: 6
RE: LiteOn SOHC-5232K vs. SA300 - Part 1 - 5/21/2004 1:40:01 PM   
Dolphinius_Rex


Posts: 3310
Joined: 9/14/2002
From: Vancouver, B.C. Canada
Status: offline
there are WAY too many variables! When all is said and done, we'll need a new thread for discussing *ALL* the data


_____________________________

Canada; Leading the world in being just north of the U.S.A.

(in reply to emperor)
Post #: 7
RE: LiteOn SOHC-5232K vs. SA300 - Part 1 - 5/21/2004 3:33:21 PM   
Halc

 

Posts: 60
Joined: 2/4/2002
From:
Status: offline
I completely agree.

More tests are needed.

However, it's interesting to keep an eye for this variable (too high PI/PO with LiteON DVD-ROMs) and if it keeps repeating, no need to waste time/money scanning LiteON DVD-ROMs...

(in reply to Dolphinius_Rex)
Post #: 8
RE: LiteOn SOHC-5232K vs. SA300 - Part 1 - 5/21/2004 3:36:44 PM   
emperor


Posts: 7210
Joined: 4/28/2004
Status: offline
Yes Halc, this is what we want to do, a big comparison with at least 100 media to make some we can say...safe results

(in reply to Halc)
Post #: 9
RE: LiteOn SOHC-5232K vs. SA300 - Part 1 - 5/21/2004 10:46:41 PM   
Dolphinius_Rex


Posts: 3310
Joined: 9/14/2002
From: Vancouver, B.C. Canada
Status: offline
hey, just make sure that you get a good spectrum of media in there

Ritek, Prodisc, Gigastorage, Princo, Optodisc, CMC, Taiyo Yuden, Mitsubishi, CMC made Mitsubishi, Lead Data, Maxell, MBIL, AOD, and maybe some of those no-name AN32 and ONIDTech DVDRs floating around. And we certainly couldn't forget Longten code media!


_____________________________

Canada; Leading the world in being just north of the U.S.A.

(in reply to emperor)
Post #: 10
RE: LiteOn SOHC-5232K vs. SA300 - Part 1 - 5/21/2004 10:57:56 PM   
emperor


Posts: 7210
Joined: 4/28/2004
Status: offline
Dolpy i don't think the problem would be the used burned media, but test (and compare) MANY burned media from any manufacturer (burned with various drives) to see the differences between the reference measurement and what the drive reports at which speed,etc, that would be highly interesting, perhaps making a relative score % so we can have finally something comparable

(in reply to Dolphinius_Rex)
Post #: 11
RE: LiteOn SOHC-5232K vs. SA300 - Part 1 - 5/22/2004 12:52:41 AM   
Halc

 

Posts: 60
Joined: 2/4/2002
From:
Status: offline
I think I have to agree with Dolphinius.

Low level actual characteristics of the media vary the most from manufacturer to manufacturer.

If one uses media from 1-3 manufacturers, this doesn't represent a wide variety in disc low level characteristics.

One needs more variance in eccentricity, thickness, etc.

Also, with my CDR/Plextools/kProbe vs CATS study that I did (limited set of 10 discs) I found out that the worst of the discs (in terms of actual bad cdr blank disc quality and bad burn quality on them) caused the most variation in C1/C2 reading results.

So, some bad quality DVDs (that are actually from el cheapo sources, not just burned badly) can be quite revealing, imho.


< Message edited by Halc -- 5/22/2004 12:53:39 AM >

(in reply to emperor)
Post #: 12
RE: LiteOn SOHC-5232K vs. SA300 - Part 1 - 5/22/2004 6:58:17 AM   
emperor


Posts: 7210
Joined: 4/28/2004
Status: offline
Halc ok then, we will try to have the highest number of different manufacturers we can find

(in reply to Halc)
Post #: 13
RE: LiteOn SOHC-5232K vs. SA300 - Part 1 - 5/22/2004 1:28:50 PM   
Dolphinius_Rex


Posts: 3310
Joined: 9/14/2002
From: Vancouver, B.C. Canada
Status: offline
Thank you Halc! That was actually exactly why I was suggesting that!

Although I have to admit that it was because of the things I've learned from your other posts on low level errors

Thanks for the hard work and effort Emperor! I'm sure whatever you guys provide will blow everyone away


_____________________________

Canada; Leading the world in being just north of the U.S.A.

(in reply to emperor)
Post #: 14
RE: LiteOn SOHC-5232K vs. SA300 - Part 1 - 5/22/2004 1:58:29 PM   
emperor


Posts: 7210
Joined: 4/28/2004
Status: offline
We will

(in reply to Dolphinius_Rex)
Post #: 15
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [Optical Storage] >> CD, DVD, BD Drives >> Writing Quality >> LiteOn SOHC-5232K vs. SA300 - Part 1 Page: [1]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.031