16X burners shootout, NEC 3500A ranks the worst!

vbimport

#1

http://www.extrememhz.com/dlcomp-p1.shtml

LG is the best. According to the author, he like NEC 3500a because it is the cheapest!

Is he right? Are we all duped/con? :a


NEC 3500A
Lite-On 832s
HP300n
Khypermedia (Cyberdrive) DX082
Lite-On 166s
Lite-On 216e


#2

I just read that to, it’s a little Disappointing, ripping speed was my big gripe, he confirmed what I thought.


#3

It is my opinion that this review has too many flaws to make it completely reliable.

  1. Neither CD or DVD write quality is tested in any way whatsoever. If burn quality was tested, they would clearly find that the NEC and Pioneer drives would totally cane LG, and especially LiteON (cough, cough). In particular, the Jitter and Land values for the NEC when writing CD-Rs at 32x is especially low compared to all other drives.

  2. The NEC does NOT take 8min+ to burn at 16x! The burn time is between 5min45sec and 6min15sec depending on the inserted media! Nero CD-DVD Speed “Create Data Disc” function should have been used for the burn tests to eliminate the data/buffer variables. Same with the Pioneer drive, that should take roughly 6min50sec to burn a 16x disc.

  3. Different amounts of data were recorded onto the tested +R DL media - not a fair test in my opinion.

All in all, it is unbelieveable how well the NEC drive performs with it’s original firmware whereas the Pioneer has required several firmware updates. It is unfortunate that NEC isn’t supporting their drive as well as Pioneer, otherwise the NEC would be the world’s best drive - by far. At the moment it is just clinging onto the “best drive” title.

Regards,
TerminalVeloCD


#4

Don’t know why I would be upset with the review…all you need is a Rip-lock disabled version firmware, right??


#5

Yup, with a rip lock-disabled firmware, the ripping times will be equivalent to the other drives. Also, you can download TDK Singapore’s firmware version 2.C7 or 2.C8 for bitsetting options.

Regards,
TerminalVeloCD


#6

Plus it is part of the fun to mess with firmwares IMO :slight_smile: I have only had the 3500A for 10 days and I have flashed it 3 times already; and downloaded 5 different versions firmwared to my hdrive.
Did I mentioned that the 3500A is only $74 free shipping at Newegg till tomorrow???
Forget about LG/Lite-ON/Pioneer. Order your NEC 3500A :stuck_out_tongue:


#7

Do you work for NEC??? :wink:


#8

the author is not a freak, so read the reviews on CDFREAKS.

ps. i don’t work for cdfreaks :slight_smile:


#9

Either that or CDRInfo’s reviews seem pretty good too!

Regards,
TerminalVeloCD


#10

This is mainly targeted at terminalvelocd’s post regarding the article.

I would have to strongly disagree with your comments.

I thoroughly tested each and every one of these drives and I can assure you that the results provided are extremely accurate.

Yes, write quality test are not provided, but that is basically because I feel that to much information will annoy most of our readers. However, this has been brought to our attention and I’m considering on providing write quality tests in future drive reviews.

The NEC, as stated in the article, is only masked by the most impressive specs. I can assure you that those who will be primarily using this drive for ripping will be quite disappointed with its performance. Sure, hacked firmare can remedy this as demonstrated in our individual review of the drive here:

http://www.extrememhz.com/nd3500a-p8.shtml

However, the difference in transfer rates is not that impressive, even with the hack firmware.

Based on our site statistics, the NEC ND-3500A article gets quite a substantial amount of hits. But that is mainly because most potential buyers are impressed with the overall specs of the drive itself. I can honestly tell you that its performance is not up to par with its specs. Writing at 16x with this drive is highly unstable and is the only drive that encountered playback issues when testing burned 16x media on standalone players. This drive was a disappointment in all aspects and is why I personally recommended the Pioneer drive over the NEC for those who absolutely must have a 4x double layer drive.

I’ve looked at both mulit-format drives from LG and can honestly tell you, based on site statistics, they are the most popular drives on the market.

You may disagree, but I personally go through some extremes to obtain proper media for testing and spend countless hours reviewing each individual drive before releasing an article I see fit for public comsumption.


Miguel Fernandez
Founder/Webmaster
Extrememhz.com
http://www.extrememhz.com
miguel@extrememhz.com


#11

Must be why I’m not one of his readers, write quality is my biggest concern on choosing a drive!

:bigsmile: :bigsmile: :bigsmile:


#12

Hello Miguel, thanks for dropping by to share your point of view.
I do believe that TerminalVeloCD brings up some good points.

For those looking for write quality testing, the Mad Dog MD-16XDVD9 (NEC ND-3500AG OEM) review is coming very soon here on cdfreaks! :slight_smile:


#13

LOL!
Miguel, write quality is of paramount importance, a few Nero CD-Speed scans at least,would have been nice, if you didn’t have time for KProbes. Heck, even
Anandtech puts KProbes in their optical drive reviews!


#14

If not for write quality, what other primary reason would you buy a DVD Writer ?
That is the only performance i care about. How can you even call it a review and compare it to other drives if you don’t test what the drives main objective is, to write (quality) discs ?

And who cares what is most popular ? I want what is the best quality writing.

I don’t question the validity of your results but are they results that really matter ? You say

I can assure you that those who will be primarily using this drive for ripping will be quite disappointed with its performance.

I say anyone who spends this amount amount of money for a DVD Writer to primarily rip DVD’s when there are DVD-Roms to be had for much much less will not only be disappointed, I also would like to meet them to sell them some swamp land in Florida.

Popular means nothing in real world living .Gateway computers are popular but i wouldn’t take one over my very unpopular self built model. I hate when people fall into that “follow the heard of sheep” mentality.

I have another Lite-On 16x DVD-Rom to rip that i paid 9 usd after rebates for so i don’t waste my DVD-Writer on that. Nor do i write CD’s with it. I have a CD Burner for that.

The only reason i bought a DVD Writer is to write DVD’s so that is what was important to me.

And as far as any reviews on any DVD Writers are concerned, i saw all the reviews i needed with the burn quality test comparing the NEC and Pioneer (clearly the top 2 that I’ve seen) to some of the others here in this forum.

So in answer to the first question:
If your DVD Writer starts not writing good clean DVD’s because of this article, then, yes, you have been duped.

If you bought it to hear what other people think about it,then yes, you have been duped.

If you bought it because you wanted a reliable DVD Writer that is consistently among the lowest in errors than most if not all of the others (all media being equal),then you made a wise decision.

I don’t even have my drive yet so i can only base my opinions on the write quality test i see here and at other forums and they look great to me.

Tom


#15

‘The NEC does NOT take 8min+ to burn at 16x! The burn time is between 5min45sec and 6min15sec depending on the inserted media!’

Exactly, that is what I am getting (the longest so far has been 6 min 30 sec); I have no idea where 8 mins comes from. In addition I have yet to have a problem with any media burned at 16x (about a dozen discs so far). I guess I will chalk it up to different configs, but I think if there are people who are getting very different results than what the review is saying, it should be noted there.


#16

There’s a lot of stuff in that comparison that simply doesn’t make sense.

To start with, in CD Read Tests we see the LG’s CPU usage shoot up to 23% at 8X, more than 3 times that of the next worst. Yet, in the DL Tests section you claim that “We see the LG drive once again dominating in our CPU Usage tests.” So it might have been better at SL, but I’d hardly call it “dominating”.

I also think your definition of “Media Compatibility” is a little off. Surely compatibility includes more than just the speed it’s written at, it’s the quality of the burn on that media? There’s no point in a drive writing to a disc at 16X if it turns out that the burn is rubbish. You allude to this in your post above, so why not include the results of such tests in the comparison?

I have to agree with the earlier comments, the review really does fall short. All it seems to compare is speed, and has a huge focus on read/ripping speed, yet it’s a comparison of writers. Why not focus more on how they write? Reading through these forums here (and other dedicated optical storage forums) it’s clear to me that the quality of the burns is the most important factor to most people - it certainly is to me. And of course the quality of the burn can have a direction relation to how fast the burned disc is later read.

I’ve looked at both mulit-format drives from LG and can honestly tell you, based on site statistics, they are the most popular drives on the market.
No offence, but I really doubt that total sales are necessarily in direct relation to your site statistics.


#17

@pookieguy: I’m sorry, but I have to agree with pcdoc. A DVD writer should be judged on how well it handles different DVD media types. A person who buys on speed alone will be ignoring the most important factor - QUALITY. As people on this forum will know, burn quality is of uttermost importance when choosing a DVD writer. LiteON drives may be faster than most, but the burn quality produced by their drives on certain media types leaves a lot to be desired.

Countless numbers of CD Freaks members have demonstrated that the NEC can easily handle the rigours of 16x writing with certain media types (YUDEN00T02 being one of them). It is my belief that the 8min+ burning time shown on your review does not provide an accurate representation of the drive’s actual performance. Also remember that times do differ slightly between burns due to NEC’s Active OPC system which slows the write speed if it detects variations in the media being used. The CDRInfo review also demonstrates that 16x writes can be achieved in under 6 minutes on certain media.

As well as that, you still have not explained why different data sizes were used in the DVD+R DL tests.

Regards,
TerminalVeloCD


#18

When I have time I will read your test article but this statement is a bit odd:
“I thoroughly tested each and every one of these drives and I can assure you that the results provided are extremely accurate.
Yes, write quality test are not provided, but that is basically because I feel that to much information will annoy most of our readers.”

On one hand you say your results are accurate, but that the info will annoy most of your readers? I guess yor readers just take your word for your testing? Also my NEC takes approx. 6min 15sec. start to finish. Look at the Liggys beta thread and look at those tests I think you will be thoroughly impressed. :wink: :wink: :wink:


#19

the disc used is 8x media burned at 16x or true 16x media? not mentioned at all…:confused:


#20

Gee, talk about argue selectively! NEC3500a for writing only???

Why can you look at the fact objectively, read Miguel’s entire review.

I was not tried to stir thing up here, but I am really disappointed with the replies so far.


for the record, not affiliate with extrememhz.com or Pioneer or Lite-On or LG or BenQ.