Bah, the Samsung 164 looks very  to me. The burned media looks very awful in the scans and transfer-rates.

(in reply to Antonio)

Why, do you remember any good Samsung?
Such a titanic manufacturer and they cannot make a decent burner.

They have excellent and huge Plasma monitors, 100" if I am not wrong, but average burners...

What do you expect from Meditek chipsets? LiteOn someone would say however have improve a lot their Mediatek based drives...

(in reply to Scour1)

A question to the 1655-review: Does an overburnt S05 works without problem? I mean when it´s used for real data and not just a data-disc made by CDspeed

(in reply to Antonio)

[Deleted by Admins]

(in reply to Scour1)

quote:

ORIGINAL: minos

Sorry for my late reply. The overburning test was done through CD-DVD Speed. I was hoping to reply to you after testing it but unfortunately our 1655 is dead, for about a week. I asked BenQ to provide me with an extra 1655 to continue our tests but I haven't received it yet.

Thanks for the reply :)

Maybe u tested to hard with the 1655 ;)

Some guys say the 1640 can overburn DVD-media. But I tried it and Nero shows an error-message, but Cdspeed said the 1640 can overburn DVD

(in reply to Deleted User)

There´s a typo in your last review, it is a 165P6S, not P5S 

Very strange writing-quality, i guess. The transfer-tests with the mediea looks mostly good (except DVD RW), but the scans show sometimes high-very high error-rates

BTW, plan a review of the LG GSA 4166? The reviews with FW 1.00 looked not so good, but newer drives have 1.01 or 1.02, looks much better than 1.00

(in reply to Scour1)

I think they fixed now, I didn't notice it.
Is it possible the transfer-tests with the mediea to look good since both burner and reader are from the same brand?

(in reply to Scour1)

[Deleted by Admins]

(in reply to Antonio)

Yes you are correct, I forgot this.

(in reply to Deleted User)

Hm, i thought the NEC 4551 is better with DVD-R , because NEC are since 3500 one of the best writers for all media

(in reply to Antonio)

[Deleted by Admins]

(in reply to Scour1)

quote:

ORIGINAL: minos

the 1.07 for 4550 is new, so maybe they made some improvements.

Don´t understand why every brand don´t use the media-experiences from their last model; every new writer seems to be more worse than the last one and need some FW-updates to get so good like the older models

(in reply to Deleted User)

[Deleted by Admins]

(in reply to Scour1)

quote:

ORIGINAL: minos

I honestly don't know, but I always had the feeling that maybe they force a drive's release due to competition and after they use as "beta testing" the results from users.

I guess you´re right

(in reply to Deleted User)

(in reply to Scour1)

The firmware seems not to be from NEC, however the drive is a NEC 4550. I am pretty sure that you can crossflash it with a NEC firmware. the 1.07.

(in reply to Scour1)