1655 and its unending problems!

vbimport

#1

intel p4 3207 mhz [2400 mhz oc @ def v] -> fsb 267 mhz x 4 = 1068 mhz
1024 mb ram [2-3-2-5 @ 2.85v] -> 214 mhz [5:4 divider] @ dual channel
p4c800-e deluxe
i875p chipset
ich5r [82801eb] -> ide pri + sec + sata 0 + 1
Promise PDC20378 -> 3rd ide + sata 2 + 3
vid: radeon 9200 vivo
aud: audigy 2

pri ide -> 1x dw-1640 [cooler master shielded round ide cable]
sec ide -> 1x dw-1655 [cooler master shielded round ide cable / replaced with round ide cable provided with abit mb]
3rd ide -> n/a
sata0 -> seagate 160gb ide [ide->sata converter]
sata1 -> wd 120gb ide [ide->sata converter] *this drive is only used for burning cd/dvd’s
sata2 -> wd 400gb sata [non-raid]
sata3 -> wd 400gb sata [non-raid]

ps ocz 600w adj
1655 -> ide-sata converter -> corsair hydrocool 200
1640 -> ide-sata converter -> 2 x 80mm intake fans
seagate 160gb ide -> shielded hd ps cable
wd 120gb ide -> shielded hd ps cable
wd 400gb sata -> sata pwr cable
wd 400gb sata -> sata pwr cable
2 x 80mm exhaust fans -> mb 3-pin fan connectors

[NOTE: system aspi not installed, nero aspi installed, i use img burn 1.3.0 and spti driver to burn image files]

peoblem #1

8x burn on 10 drives simultaneously
as stated in the above post, i cant even do trt with 2 drives @ 16x. it works
but only upto 8x. as the test with the 10 drives involved, it used create-data-disk, hence
hd was accessed, since i also did trt tests, theres no hd involved, so both drives should
be able to read @ 16x, inless im missing something else.

the reason behind me wanting to use 2 drives at once is so that i can burn @ 8-12x on 1 drive
while simultaneously doing trt and pie/pif scanning on the other, this helps a lot in reducing
times as usually i have to burn 10-15 discs, and doing trt + scanning 1 at a time takes a lot of time.

i would really appreciate it if som1 can help me solve this problem!

peoblem #2

i cant burn ty t02 @ 12x [using the t02 @ t03 strat swap YUDEN000 T02 to YUDEN000 Tx2
and YUDEN000 T03 to YUDEN000 T02] on the 1655! i dont want to use the default t02 write
strat coz then i have to enable sb+os but especially coz i have to use wopc.

if i disable wopc then it only burns @ 8x, even if i select 12x! on top of that wopc seems to
screw up ty discs, and produce more pif’s.

after reading alan1476’s post [http://club.cdfreaks.com/showpost.php?p=1368096&postcount=323]
i changed the cooler master shielded round ide cable that i was using with a un-used round ide cable
that was provided with abit mb. but another burn after changing the cable still produced a disc that
failed the trt test. also as some of the other 12x burns [albeit with wopc+sb+os] was successfull
with the 1655 i dont think it was the cable!

i would like to burn using the above t02->t03 swap method to burn these t02 @ 12x without using
sb/os and esp. wopc, but without any coasters that is! so, i would appreciate any help regarding this
problem.

[NOTE: <-x = disc unusuable after the burn, unless other info is provided]

–bcdb.spdptchd[t02=t03]-- @1655
00221-12x–5:52–wopc=of–sb=of <-x
1920/489.82/7986382–652/121.73/1824251–101546–17338

00222-12x–5:52–wopc=of–sb=of <-x
191/27.06/396518–5/0.03/256–0--17639

–bcdb.rpc1.spdptchd-- @1655
00264-12x–6:35–wopc+sb+os
10/1.55/12204–6/0.07/833–0--17663

00265-12x–6:37–wopc+sb+os
9/1.55/12091–5/0.03/277–0--17880

00266-12x–5:59–wopc+sb+os
9/1.41/9221–5/0.02/156–0--

00267-12x–6:20–wopc+sb+os
10/1.40/10351–5/0.06/502–0--17021

00268-12x–6:46–sb+os <- 8x !! [NOTE: selected 12x but burned @ 8x coz i disabled wopc!]
8/1.52/9599–6/0.02/185–0--14590

00269-12x–6:45–sb+os <- 8x !! [new spindle of 50] [NOTE: selected 12x but burned @ 8x coz i disabled wopc!]
15/2.67/20552–5/0.03/229–0--15416

–bcdb.spdptchd[t02=t03]-- @1655
00272-12x–5:54 <-x
781/65.83/1011870–12/0.33/2811–0--17849

00273-12x–5:54 <-x
2129/462.71/7444714–539/57.53/855413–14032–17729

–bcgb.spdptchd[t02=t03]-- @1655
00280-12x–5:33 <-x [NOTE: b4 replacing the cooler master shielded ide cable]
1833/456.96/6850999–441/66.16/906895–6582–16088

00281-12x–5:34 <-x [NOTE: after replacing with the abit rounded ide cable]


00221–bcdb.spdptchd[t02=t03]-- @1655
<a href=“http://imageshack.us”><img src=“http://img193.imageshack.us/img193/4864/002210602281554119wz.png” border=“0” width=“753” alt=“Image Hosted by ImageShack.us” /></a><a href=“http://imageshack.us”><img src=“http://img193.imageshack.us/img193/6092/002210602281558357dm.png” border=“0” width=“641” alt=“Image Hosted by ImageShack.us” /></a><a href=“http://imageshack.us”><img src=“http://img193.imageshack.us/img193/5366/002210602281613094xa.png” border=“0” width=“641” alt=“Image Hosted by ImageShack.us” /></a>

00222–bcdb.spdptchd[t02=t03]-- @1655
<a href=“http://imageshack.us”><img src=“http://img482.imageshack.us/img482/7797/002220602281622318bv.png” border=“0” width=“753” alt=“Image Hosted by ImageShack.us” /></a><a href=“http://imageshack.us”><img src=“http://img482.imageshack.us/img482/3387/002220602281633156ee.png” border=“0” width=“641” alt=“Image Hosted by ImageShack.us” /></a><a href=“http://imageshack.us”><img src=“http://img193.imageshack.us/img193/6530/002220602281643153ua.png” border=“0” width=“641” alt=“Image Hosted by ImageShack.us” /></a>

00268–bcdb.rpc1.spdptchd-- @1655
<a href=“http://imageshack.us”><img src=“http://img382.imageshack.us/img382/6126/002680604092234410yj.png” border=“0” width=“753” alt=“Image Hosted by ImageShack.us” /></a><a href=“http://imageshack.us”><img src=“http://img382.imageshack.us/img382/2873/002680604092240406jp.png” border=“0” width=“641” alt=“Image Hosted by ImageShack.us” /></a><a href=“http://imageshack.us”><img src=“http://img382.imageshack.us/img382/5462/002680604092252121em.png” border=“0” width=“641” alt=“Image Hosted by ImageShack.us” /></a>

00269–bcdb.rpc1.spdptchd-- @1655
<a href=“http://imageshack.us”><img src=“http://img382.imageshack.us/img382/3908/002690604092305469qi.png” border=“0” width=“753” alt=“Image Hosted by ImageShack.us” /></a><a href=“http://imageshack.us”><img src=“http://img482.imageshack.us/img482/8748/002690604092311370wj.png” border=“0” width=“641” alt=“Image Hosted by ImageShack.us” /></a><a href=“http://imageshack.us”><img src=“http://img482.imageshack.us/img482/696/002690604092320461ml.png” border=“0” width=“641” alt=“Image Hosted by ImageShack.us” /></a>

00272–bcdb.spdptchd[t02=t03]-- @1655
<a href=“http://imageshack.us”><img src=“http://img482.imageshack.us/img482/4819/002720604181855373sq.png” border=“0” width=“753” alt=“Image Hosted by ImageShack.us” /></a><a href=“http://imageshack.us”><img src=“http://img382.imageshack.us/img382/1307/002720604181901433fc.png” border=“0” width=“641” alt=“Image Hosted by ImageShack.us” /></a><a href=“http://imageshack.us”><img src=“http://img482.imageshack.us/img482/8081/002720604182015385ml.png” border=“0” width=“641” alt=“Image Hosted by ImageShack.us” /></a>

00273–bcdb.spdptchd[t02=t03]-- @1655
<a href=“http://imageshack.us”><img src=“http://img382.imageshack.us/img382/3898/002730604181945379yb.png” border=“0” width=“753” alt=“Image Hosted by ImageShack.us” /></a><a href=“http://imageshack.us”><img src=“http://img482.imageshack.us/img482/5181/002730604182020348yi.png” border=“0” width=“641” alt=“Image Hosted by ImageShack.us” /></a><a href=“http://imageshack.us”><img src=“http://img482.imageshack.us/img482/6373/002730604182035095op.png” border=“0” width=“641” alt=“Image Hosted by ImageShack.us” /></a>

00280–bcgb.spdptchd[t02=t03]-- @1655
<a href=“http://imageshack.us”><img src=“http://img382.imageshack.us/img382/4225/002800604212326252yf.png” border=“0” width=“753” alt=“Image Hosted by ImageShack.us” /></a><a href=“http://imageshack.us”><img src=“http://img482.imageshack.us/img482/5851/002800604212330200bj.png” border=“0” width=“641” alt=“Image Hosted by ImageShack.us” /></a><a href=“http://imageshack.us”><img src=“http://img382.imageshack.us/img382/1677/002800604212341586jk.png” border=“0” width=“641” alt=“Image Hosted by ImageShack.us” /></a>

00281–bcgb.spdptchd[t02=t03]-- @1655
<a href=“http://imageshack.us”><img src=“http://img382.imageshack.us/img382/4378/002810604220104230jm.png” border=“0” width=“753” alt=“Image Hosted by ImageShack.us” /></a><a href=“http://imageshack.us”><img src=“http://img186.imageshack.us/img186/1444/002810604220108236pr.png” border=“0” width=“641” alt=“Image Hosted by ImageShack.us” /></a>


#2

…the reason behind me wanting to use 2 drives at once is so that i can burn @ 8-12x on 1 drive
while simultaneously doing trt and pie/pif scanning on the other, this helps a lot in reducing
times as usually i have to burn 10-15 discs, and doing trt + scanning 1 at a time takes a lot of time…

If you’re concerned with burn quality,
that’s not a good idea. :disagree:


#3

I agree.

Your system specs are very nice but burning and scanning will strain your I/O subsystems (mainly the IDE channels/controllers) too much.

When I bought my new system (see the desktop in my sig) the sales-person gave me all the blurb about AMD X2s being able to burn DVDs while playing games, surfing the net etc but the CPU isn’t the deciding factor in DVD burning it’s the data flow to the burner that’s important.

If you need to burn more than one DVD/CD simultaniously buy a dedicated duplicator.

If you need to scan and burn simultaniously then buy a cheep second user PC and a BenQ/LiteOn to go in it.

These are the only ways you will 100% avoid all problems.


#4

I tried burning 3 different images at the same time using my DW1650, DW1655 and Samsung SH-W162C and it was good only when the images were feeding from 3 different hard disks. I then tried my fastest disk feeding 2 different images to my two BenQs simultaneously, and then feeding only one image to both drives at the same time. In both cases burner speed increased due to slower flow of data to the burners, and the subsequent scans revealed more PIFs than normal for that media. I also tried burning on one BenQ while scanning on the other, but in this case I did not experience any bottlenecks. If you still want to carry on scanning/burning at the same time, I would recommend to scan using a drive via USB2 and burn with your PATA writer. (or vice versa). I found that at least on my rig this combination is quite safe quality-wise. To my limited experience, burning via USB utilises the CPU more than PATA burns, so it may be a good idea to leave your computer alone when simultaneously burning/scanning via PATA and USB.


#5

It looks like every burn that was done with the T03 strategy, regardless of all other parameters, produced miserable results, so maybe you should give up on that idea…


#6

I do it all the time. Burn in one drive, read in another, scan in yet another. Never had a problem with burn quality.

Why should it matter [presuming the system can supply data to the burning drive without interruptions]?


#7

Here’s an experiment showing three drives reading in parallel: http://club.cdfreaks.com/showpost.php?p=1393405&postcount=9

I am going to do a two burns+one scan test later today and post the results.

One burn+one scan is no problem, but I haven’t tried two burns in parallel yet. I am curious.

Will let you know what happened.


#8

All right, the results of two parallel burns + one scan.

Both burns were 8x P-CAV on RITEK R03 media.

Burn 1 is a 4482 MB image from SATA hard drive 1 to secondary IDE slave DW1655 [device 3:1].
Burn 2 is a 4192 MB image from SATA hard drive 2 to primary IDE slave PX-716A [device 0:1].
The scan is a 7192 MB image read by an external USB DW1620 [device 7:0].

Here we are at the very beginning. Plextor has spent a little longer than BenQ in the leadin, and is starting at 8000 RPM, while BenQ is off at 9200 RPM.


#9

At around 1/3. BenQ is still ahead. The scan is going at 8x CAV, not getting very far yet.


#10

Near 1/2.


#11

Near 3/4. Plextor and BenQ are now head to head, thanks to Plextor not making as many WOPC stops along the way.


#12

And at the end, both burns complete after 8.5 minutes.


#13

I hope this puts to rest the notion that doing burning and scanning in parallel puts some strain on the IDE and USB buses. 22 MB/s going to two burners on two separate IDE channels and a little scan data running on the USB bus presents no difficulty to a modern [well, two year old] computer.


#14

While I was writing this, the quality scans of the burns shown above have completed.

No visible problems there either.

P.S. The $50 drive outperforms the $120 one, as usual. :slight_smile:


#15

Interesting experiment agent0009, thanks for that. Haven’t tried it out myself yet, at least with DVD burning that is, but I’m pretty confident that most modern PCs should be able to handle the IO load.


#16

Yes, very interesting. Thank you for taking the time to set that up [B]agent009[/B] :flower:

I must admit I have never tried two burns at once let alone a scan as-well (don’t have enough drives for the scan too).

I am thinking that if I attempt this experiment then I will not get the same results due to only having one HDD (SATA). It would be fun to see how my machine copes though.

On paper it should make it. The Disk has a burst rate of 110MB/s and a sustained of just over 60MB/s. The overhead of moving the drive heads to read and transfer two ISOs at 22MB/s each could be pushing it though.


#17

It should be doable if your hard drive has a 16 MB hardware buffer, and it’s not full and the images don’t end up at the end, too close to the center, where the transfer rate slows down to 35-40 MB/s.

2 x 11 MB/s with, say, 10 ms seek times, would put the dual-burn process at about 40% time spent reading, seek times in the single-digit % of the total, with some bandwidth to spare.

The trouble comes if your virtual memory swap file lives on the same drive, and you try to do anything else while burning. Windows [B]lo-o-o-oves[/B] to write to the swap file all day long, no matter how many GB of RAM you have. I run with 2+ GB of RAM free at any time, and it still goes to the swap file on a regular basis. Programmers in Redmond are not as smart as they think they are!


#18

8x burn on 10 drives simultaneously

lol, first of all sry, im always not clear/articulate in my explanations, what i mean was, if he had shown transfer rate test [trt]
and pie/pif scans then we couldve known for sure if those discs are even usable.

as he only burned them, without showing any sort of scans! i mean burning 4, 5, 6, 7 or even 8 dvd’s altogether isnt even worth
anything if u cant read the discs back at all, right?

again sry for that 8x comment, i meant 12x, and certainly 16x is not possible! aamof, ive done 2 8x burns, using a 1620 and a
[lite-on] 1693s, using an image, that was being fed to the 2 burners simultaneously. i did this test back in july of 2005,
but my 12x tests failed, let me add, miserably!

i confirmed this again when i did trt tests, 8x went just fine but read curve went haywire shortly after that. ill post both
the burn and trt scans at the other thread ive started, 1655 and its unending problems!!![/QUOTE]

benq dw1620 = 00034 [15th july 2005]
lite-on 1693s = 00035 [15th july 2005]
<a href=“http://imageshack.us”><img src=“http://img161.imageshack.us/img161/6919/000340507151739286xc.png” border=“0” width=“960” alt=“Image Hosted by ImageShack.us” /></a>

00034 @ 8x - dw1620
<a href=“http://imageshack.us”><img src=“http://img161.imageshack.us/img161/9394/000340507151751479gu.png” border=“0” width=“641” alt=“Image Hosted by ImageShack.us” /></a><a href=“http://imageshack.us”><img src=“http://img58.imageshack.us/img58/2305/000340507151811444ba.png” border=“0” width=“641” alt=“Image Hosted by ImageShack.us” /></a>

00035 @8x - 1693s [scanned using dw1620]
<a href=“http://imageshack.us”><img src=“http://img161.imageshack.us/img161/7141/000350507162019163kl.png” border=“0” width=“641” alt=“Image Hosted by ImageShack.us” /></a></a><a href=“http://imageshack.us”><img src=“http://img172.imageshack.us/img172/6051/000350507162030012jq.png” border=“0” width=“641” alt=“Image Hosted by ImageShack.us” /></a>

transfer rate tests of 00034 & 00035 [22nd april 2006]

@8x<a href=“http://imageshack.us”><img src=“http://img172.imageshack.us/img172/5066/1640trt8x2oq.png” border=“0” width=“640” alt=“Image Hosted by ImageShack.us” /><a href=“http://imageshack.us”><img src=“http://img172.imageshack.us/img172/285/1655trt8x4hj.png” border=“0” width="" alt=“Image Hosted by ImageShack.us” /></a>
@16x<a href=“http://imageshack.us”><img src=“http://img172.imageshack.us/img172/811/1640trt16x3rw.png” border=“0” width=“640” alt=“Image Hosted by ImageShack.us” /><a href=“http://imageshack.us”><img src=“http://img172.imageshack.us/img172/2813/1655trt16x9ji.png” border=“0” width="" alt=“Image Hosted by ImageShack.us” /></a>

unfortunately i dont have the 12x burn screenshots, but lets just say both the write and read graphs werent so good!


#19

Chuck44 & Kim Jong, thanx for ur help, i guess trt & burning might cause some problems @ speeds
over 8x, but scanning [pie/pif] and burning shouldnt have an adverse effect on the burn quality, as
demonstrated by agent009!

CyberMan969, well i do use a dedicated hd for burning, but i have 3 more, incase i wanted to burn several
dvd’s at once. i dont think scanning + burning, simultaneously even if the drives are on 2 diffrent ide channels,
will have a negative effect on the burn qualty, tho i havent tried it yet myself!

agent009, i always thought scanning pie/pif dosent use up as much of the bus bandwidth as trt/burning! btw,
thank u very much for putting effort into doing that test. also, have u done a full trt test @ 16x for those 2 disc’s,
were the reading curves smooth?

as mentined previously ive done 2 8x burns [and trt] simultaneously, and failed at 12x burn [and even trt.]
guess i was vague in asking questions. as i usually do trt @ 16x, theres no way to do a 16x burn at the same
time, or even a 12x burn without trashing the disc completely. but a 8x trt and burn is doable.

so is there a negative [i.e. higher chance of missing a bad burn,] if i do a 8x trt instead of a 16x? 1 positive thing
might be the drive motor having a longer life span as it wont rotate @ top rpm most of the time doing trt, i think!

lmao, windows and swap? have u seen the [ram] harddrive cache management? thats y i have dedicated
the first 2gb’s of both the wd 400gb hdds to swap, those r the 1s with the 16mb cache, so that absolutely
no swap access [and theres a lot of those, just idle ur comp and watch the hdd access indicator light up
like a christmas tree] takes place on the system/burner hdds.

well the 8x burns on the t03 strat [1640/1655] were okay. 1st 12x burn on the 1640 using that t03 strat was
very good, the 2nd 12x burn failed trt but the pie/pif scan was excellent! when i os’ed with the default t02
strat the media still gave good results.

my optimism for the t03 strat was based on postings by zevia and alan1476’s post’s in hanging DVD±R write
strategies (results thread)
. post #305 & #306 by zevia, aamof after reading post #306 i changed the
swapping method mentioned therein.

after reading these 2 posts by alan1476, #321 & especially #323, i changed the round ide cable to see if
that would help.he has also posted scan of a 16x t02 media burn in post #326 & a trt scan in post #327.

only 1655 has not been able to burn anything even remotely usable using the t02@t03 strat swap.
but hopefully som1 can help me with this problem, wonder if they can?


#20

Anyone try formatting their HDD with a 2mb cluster size? As long as the drive is going to be used for image files, it shouldn’t waste space, but should speed up transfering large chunks of data.