LiteOn DH-20A4P needs riplock removed? (scans vs. AOpen DVD-1648AAP/Pro)

Just built this new system and posted other threads complaining the LiteOn ripped slow, so I decided to do some comparing, relevant system specs as follows:

-Abit IP35 vanilla (P35 chipset)
-Intel E6420 @ 3.2ghz/400fsb, DDR2-800 @ 960mhz
-Western Digital WD7500AAKS SATA hard drive
-AOpen DVD1648AAP/Pro PATA dvd-rom (slave)
-LiteOn DH-20A4P PATA dvd burner (master)
-Vista Business 32bit, Intel storage matrix 7.8.0.1012 driver (ICH9R)
-Nero DriveSpeed used for read rate adjustment

First are the single layer comparisons using a backup I just made:

LiteOn


AOpen


Not much to talk about here, about the same it seems (weird cpu usage from the liteon?)

Now Clerks II original DVD in dual layer:

LiteOn


AOpen


Now I checked in drive speed and noticed you *CANNOT* set the LiteOn to 16X in dual layer mode, which is likely a firmware issue and some sort of riplock will need to be removed from it for dual layer ripping?

LiteOn


AOpen



Had the AOpen for many years now, would be nice if I could ditch it and rip from the liteon if the performance was there, the end of that DL scan shows some age on the AOpen's part... a lot of movies do that towards the end

Well thanks for the screen shots but where in the heck are the speeds? Just run a TRT and that's all so we can see the speeds.

Looks like the LO reads way better than the Aopen.

look at the charts, the liteon rips "better quality" because the aopen's getting tired, a few discs have exploded in it (were damaged to begin with from netflix etc) and i've used it daily for probably 4yrs now, it has struggled near the end of discs for a long time... regardless in all my apps it's apparent the liteon takes significantly longer to rip a disc (dvdshrink/dvdfab etc), that's why i decided to do a comparison because everyone around here kept saying how the liteon will do 16X in dual layer all day without a firmware modification... and it simply doesn't.

Let me refraise my reply. Where the heck are the speed times? Your screen shots end with the spin up and down times

are you not seeing the pictures? it shows the liteon never breaks 12x and the aopen gets going much faster earlier on and has a much higher maximum

Yeah, where is the transfer rate test?

yeah and what were the times

Besides you are running a READ speed test. Your not ripping anything to your HDD

I don't know why you can't just read the graphs? Look at different points (0.0 1.0 2.0 etc) how the AOpen is significantly faster

this correlates to exactly the same behavior i get when ripping with dvdshrink/dvdfab, the liteon does the disc much slower... the whole reason i put the aopen in this new computer because i was disappointed with how slowly the liteon was ripping DL dvds!

We need proper testing to look at here with times and an actual rip, not read speeds etc....

Ok let me put it this way. RE-do the TRT's please..... if you won't show an actual rip. There are more variables with an actual rip though.

uh ok, the liteon never reaches 16X and within drivespeed i can't set it above 12X, that proves it won't do over 12X regardless of how the moon and sun align or how many different scans i do to make you happy

ok will rip with dvd decrypter and post results with both drives then...

Why even start a thread if you cannot give the speed times i have no idea

Actually to sum it up i doubt you will find a reader/ripper CD/DVD writer any faster or as fast than your Aopen.

12x it's the max speed on dl ripping on LiteOn.

I shall say this for the sake of anyone who's wondering why these drives "only" read at 12x: most DVD burners will NOT do stable ripping of DVD DL media above 12x. There are some, but the drives have to be in very good shape, and the discs have to be pristine. Otherwise, it will actually take LONGER at 16x or 14x than at 12x. This has been tested for multiple drive generations now, and generally remains the same.

As rakter put it, 12x is the max for LiteOn drives. And as rolling56 put it, you probably won't find anything faster than your AOpen drive for ripping.

Now, to fix the confusion: We are suggesting that you run ONLY a Transfer Rate Test. Select Run Test>>Transfer Rate. This way, we can see exactly how large the difference between the two drives is, TIME-wise, not flat-out speed-wise. As it is, we cannot see how long each of the drives took to read the disc. Running a TRT by itself will leave the total time it took to read the disc up. THAT'S what we need to see.

yeah i wish this person would have showed the times. Especially the SL discs but both SL & DL would have been better. I don't have the Aopen to test.

Should read the specs when buying a drive.

My Sammy S203B reads SL discs @18X. Ripping.......i haven't timed it. I believe CK had his up to 20X for SL discs.

That's to fast. Especially when this person has discs flying apart at 16X

decrypter results:

LiteOn peaked ~16,700kb/sec or 12.1x
completed in 11:40

AOpen peaked ~20,000kb/sec or 14.5x
completed in 9:40

My argument isn't the LiteOn is inferior, the point i'm trying to make is the firmware restricts it to 12x in dual layer and the AOpen will try to get to 16x if it can... so on this peticular disc the AOpen is 20% faster, but i'm sure this rip setting can be resolved within the firmware?

furthermore, WHAT drive reader or burner can beat my aopen because I need to purchase a 2nd drive that matches the case anyway and this one's getting tired

Job for CK but if you have discs flying apart i don't think it's wise to have 2 drives doing it.

It could be addressed, but many of the members prefer it to stay at the "stable" speed of 12x. 16x has been attempted with burners, but it didn't always fare too well. [Search the forum for a few examples]. I also believe CK thought it wise to keep the A1 and A4 drives at lower speeds [the A1 are noisy, and the A4 may share that trait; there may also be other issues...].

I've not heard too many stories of broken discs. I have only from drives having issues reading at high speed, so they lowered their speeds automatically. Even if there was a bad disc, I'm not sure we would have known it.

never had a "structually sound" disc "fly apart" at speeds near 16x :/

i'm fine with that, i'll buy whatever drive i need to go match or beat this aopen... you can adjust the read speed with drivespeed in windows if noise was a concern anyway so i dunno... it's noisy enough @ 12x might as well go to 16 if the drive can do it and not destroy discs