|
|
|
scans from my new litey SHM-165H6S
|
|
AfterDawn Addict
6 product reviews
|
19. May 2006 @ 10:00 |
Link to this message
|
Here's some scans done on a 8x verbatim dvd+r lightscribe disc burned with my new SHM-165H6S @ 8x. For some reason the score of nero quality scan is always better when scanned with my benq 1620 even though the scan done with my litey the PIF totals are lower. I don't put much validity in scans anyway but tend to trust those done with kprobe more over nero disc quality. Just my personal preferance I guess.
I was torn between this drive and a benq 1655. This one was on sale and liteys have always performed well in my experiences so I chose this one. I plan to upgrade my benq 1620 to a 1650 in the future.
Time will tell as this drive has a feature similiar to solidburn called hypertuning and although the burns are by no means bad they might even improve as it is used.
Edit: looks like now is the time to upgrade my 1620 with a 1650. $36.98 total. http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16827101010
Rig #1 Asus Rampage Formula Mobo, Intel Core2Quad Q9450 CPU @ 3.55ghz, 2gb Corsair DDR2 1066 Dominator Ram @ 5-5-5-15, TR Ultra 120 Extreme w/ Scythe 9 blade 110 cfm 120mm Fan HSF, HIS Radeon 512mb HD3850 IceQ TurboX GPU, Corsair 620HX P/S, CM Stacker 830 Evo Case, Rig #2 Asus P5W DH Deluxe Mobo, Intel C2D E6600 CPU @ 3.6ghz, 2gb Corsair XMS2 DDR2 800 Ram @ 4-4-4-12-2t, Zalman CNPS9500LED HSF, Sapphire Radeon X850XT PE GPU, Corsair 620HX P/S, Cooler Master Mystique Case, Viewsonic 20.1" Widescreen Digital LCD Monitor, Klipsch Promedia Ultra 5.1 THX Desktop Speakers, http://valid.x86-secret.com/show_oc.php?id=348351 http://valid.x86-secret.com/show_oc.php?id=236435This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 19. May 2006 @ 10:24
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
AfterDawn Addict
6 product reviews
|
21. May 2006 @ 19:44 |
Link to this message
|
Here's a couple scans of my 1st DL burns with this drive. The 1st scan was burned at 2.4x and the 2nd one was burned at 4x. They both play back fine.
Rig #1 Asus Rampage Formula Mobo, Intel Core2Quad Q9450 CPU @ 3.55ghz, 2gb Corsair DDR2 1066 Dominator Ram @ 5-5-5-15, TR Ultra 120 Extreme w/ Scythe 9 blade 110 cfm 120mm Fan HSF, HIS Radeon 512mb HD3850 IceQ TurboX GPU, Corsair 620HX P/S, CM Stacker 830 Evo Case, Rig #2 Asus P5W DH Deluxe Mobo, Intel C2D E6600 CPU @ 3.6ghz, 2gb Corsair XMS2 DDR2 800 Ram @ 4-4-4-12-2t, Zalman CNPS9500LED HSF, Sapphire Radeon X850XT PE GPU, Corsair 620HX P/S, Cooler Master Mystique Case, Viewsonic 20.1" Widescreen Digital LCD Monitor, Klipsch Promedia Ultra 5.1 THX Desktop Speakers, http://valid.x86-secret.com/show_oc.php?id=348351 http://valid.x86-secret.com/show_oc.php?id=236435 |
|
zebadee
Member
|
21. May 2006 @ 21:09 |
Link to this message
|
Hi Mort81,
Reason why you get this difference is down to scanning interval.
Burns are good too. Way to go.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 21. May 2006 @ 21:24
|
AfterDawn Addict
6 product reviews
|
21. May 2006 @ 21:29 |
Link to this message
|
|
zebadee,
Thanks for the info. I knew there was a difference in the way nero interperted the scans between those drive makes but wasn't exactly sure what it was. That is still a better burn @ 4x on DL media than I could get with my old litey 1653 or benq 1620. The burn @ 2.4x is comparable to what they would do in regards to PIF but better in regards to PIE.
Rig #1 Asus Rampage Formula Mobo, Intel Core2Quad Q9450 CPU @ 3.55ghz, 2gb Corsair DDR2 1066 Dominator Ram @ 5-5-5-15, TR Ultra 120 Extreme w/ Scythe 9 blade 110 cfm 120mm Fan HSF, HIS Radeon 512mb HD3850 IceQ TurboX GPU, Corsair 620HX P/S, CM Stacker 830 Evo Case, Rig #2 Asus P5W DH Deluxe Mobo, Intel C2D E6600 CPU @ 3.6ghz, 2gb Corsair XMS2 DDR2 800 Ram @ 4-4-4-12-2t, Zalman CNPS9500LED HSF, Sapphire Radeon X850XT PE GPU, Corsair 620HX P/S, Cooler Master Mystique Case, Viewsonic 20.1" Widescreen Digital LCD Monitor, Klipsch Promedia Ultra 5.1 THX Desktop Speakers, http://valid.x86-secret.com/show_oc.php?id=348351 http://valid.x86-secret.com/show_oc.php?id=236435This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 21. May 2006 @ 21:31
|
AfterDawn Addict
6 product reviews
|
21. May 2006 @ 23:46 |
Link to this message
|
This is the same DL disc burned at 4x with my 165h6s only this time scanned with my benq 1620. One reason why I don't put much validity on scans. Quality score of 77 when scanned with one drive and quality score of 94 when scanned with another drive. Same disc.
Rig #1 Asus Rampage Formula Mobo, Intel Core2Quad Q9450 CPU @ 3.55ghz, 2gb Corsair DDR2 1066 Dominator Ram @ 5-5-5-15, TR Ultra 120 Extreme w/ Scythe 9 blade 110 cfm 120mm Fan HSF, HIS Radeon 512mb HD3850 IceQ TurboX GPU, Corsair 620HX P/S, CM Stacker 830 Evo Case, Rig #2 Asus P5W DH Deluxe Mobo, Intel C2D E6600 CPU @ 3.6ghz, 2gb Corsair XMS2 DDR2 800 Ram @ 4-4-4-12-2t, Zalman CNPS9500LED HSF, Sapphire Radeon X850XT PE GPU, Corsair 620HX P/S, Cooler Master Mystique Case, Viewsonic 20.1" Widescreen Digital LCD Monitor, Klipsch Promedia Ultra 5.1 THX Desktop Speakers, http://valid.x86-secret.com/show_oc.php?id=348351 http://valid.x86-secret.com/show_oc.php?id=236435This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 21. May 2006 @ 23:53
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
zebadee
Member
|
22. May 2006 @ 06:15 |
Link to this message
|
|
Hi Mort81,
The scans between the the Litey & BenQ for SL, when taking into account the scanning intervals. Plus the fact that no 2 drives will give the same result. Look good & are close enough to each other to confirm said results.
With DL it appears the Litey has problems, this maybe layer break related. Bring on the f/w updates.
|
|
