1620 Vs 1640

vbimport

#1

Hi, I,m new to this forum, hoping someone can help me decide what’s the best choice for me: the old 1620 or wait for the new 1640?
Will waiting be worthwile? I will probably not be burning Dual Layer for a while, as they are still quite expensive. So I just bought a bundle of YUDEN000T02 as they seem burn fast and in good quality on both drives.
Does the 1640 really perform better than the 1620? Or is it just that 1640 can burn dual layer faster?
The BenQ 1640 is not yet in the stores in the Netherlands, so I don’t know if it will be a lot more expensive than the 1620. If so, I’m still in doubt what’s best for me…
Who can help me decide?

Thanks,
Sjaak


#2

From what I’ve seen so far, both drives use the same chipset and it looks like even the same optical pickup, leading to very similar results. There are some differences in the layout that are supposed to improve internal airflow and thus cooling, and 1640 is a bit shorter, making it more suitable for small cases. 1640 also appears to be about ten seconds faster on 16x burns due to either more efficient WOPC or shorter lead-in/lead-out times. If higher-speed ±RW or +R9 burning isn’t important to you, there is little reason to wait for 1640, in my opinion.

All that said, I will probably get one as soon as it hits the first U.S. online retailer, anyway :slight_smile:


#3

Thanks a lot agent 009!!
As I said before, for now R9 burning isn’t important to me (and if indeed the drives are rather similar, then maybe it will be possible to flash the drive to a 1640 later on).
These 10 secs differene in 16x burns don’t bother me.
So now I can go and buy a 1620 (available with us in Holland for Euro 42 (approx. $ 53). The 1640 is not available in Holland yet, but in Germany 1640 prices start from Euro 64 (Appprox $82). So I think, with a 1620 I will get a lot more value for my money.
Again, thanks a lot!


#4

I’m about to make the same decision. Been trying to read all the scan graphs posted in the forum and always come to the same conclusion…I don’t understand anything! :sad:

Could anyone please tell me if the quality of the 1640 seems promising, and worth the wait?
Speed isn’t really an issue for me, while burn quality is very important.

Thanks alot! :bow:


#5

Here’s my opinion. DVD writing quality looks about the same to me, which is expected, given the similarities in hardware. The variations you see are mostly within the normal range you get with different drive/media specimens. There are some questionable scans but nothing that I would worry too much about.

On a cautious note, while it’s too early to speculate about how the 1640 will turn out eventually when its firmware matures, if the history of NEC 3520 vs 3500, Plextor 716 vs 712, and Pioneer 109 vs 108 is any indication, revisions of good designs have not always been better.

We’ll know for sure in a few weeks. In the meantime, if I were you, I would go ahead and get a 1620. It’s a solid, versatile, time-tested drive that can be had for amazingly low prices. It has excellent firmware and plenty of patching tools/possibilities to entertain yourself should you get bored with its standard, factory-default behavior.


#6

http://club.cdfreaks.com/showthread.php?t=134713


#7

>>We’ll know for sure in a few weeks. In the meantime,
>>if I were you, I would go ahead and get a 1620. It’s a solid, versatile,
>>time-tested drive that can be had for amazingly low prices. It has excellent
>>firmware and plenty of patching tools/possibilities to entertain yourself
>>should you get bored with its standard, factory-default behavior.

Ok for all… but 1620 will never (maybe I’m wrong, but I don’t think so) do DVD+RW 8X, which will shortly become a standard.


#8

Looking at the price of (SL) 8x speed media falling every day, not that many care about RW speed-up IMO.

During my DVD burning career, I burned 600+ SL discs and worn out 3 RW´s (3 are still in use).

Do we really care about 8x RW burn speed? :stuck_out_tongue:

@agent009, very well said… :iagree:


#9

I burn my monthly/weekly backups (and C: disk image) on Verbatim DVD+RW 4X…

I get them for 1 euro each and they still work… But 15min to burn is a bit long.


#10

Edit. Way off topic

Heh, I use RICOHJPN-W11 for my backups of C:\ with Ghost in doze… :slight_smile:

With full compression, mission completed in ~10 minutes. My C:\ is right now 5GB out of 45.
Can’t see any need for faster (>4x) RW burns. I take a beer and halfway my backup is done. :bigsmile:

/off topic

Right now, the only BenQ drive I can recommend without any doubts is 1620.


#11

I only have 1 DVD+RW that is now worn out… and I’ve got this DVD+RW with my LiteOn 411. =)

edit: Backup? What’s this? =) If my hard drive fails… all the sources of my programs including NecDump and WOPC_Tool are gone for good. =)