16x DVD writers entering the retail market



16x DVD+R writers have finally come.

Philips-BenQ DW1600A. The first 16x DVD+R drive probably, also previewed at CDFreaks and CDRLabs weeks ago. Initial price is about 13,000 Japanese Yen.


Pioneer DVR-A08. Initial price is about 17,000 Japanese Yen. Impress revealed its performance is not that great yesterday.



NEC, Lite-On, LG, and a few others will soon join.


As new drives enter the market, 8x and 12x drives are getting cheaper day by day.

http://www.bless.co.jp has Pioneer DVR-A08 for 8,888 Yen which is about US$80.


Funny here you cant get reliable and good 8x Media and there are already 12x Burners out and now 16x Burners in my opinion stupid.

The could sell more to the users when there were media already available on the market and not when the media is not available same with Dual Layer :Z


It seems to me the media situation is about the same everywhere, perhaps except in Taiwan where the largest manufacturers are concentrated and first try their products on retail market and ship to wholesalers.

The more you search, the easier it seems to find the right media. Some people in Germany have reported the availabillity of 8x DVD+R that burn at 12x very well. It will not be much to have to wait for 16x DVD+R from Taiyo Yuden. DL media are already available and they are played well in some of the most common DVD players. They are of very high quality.


Moore’s Law is wonderful. Too bad the media always seems one step behind the drives.


While there might not be 12x or 16x media out, perhaps the newer drives are better at burning at 8x than the earlier ones, which would be a welcome improvement in and of itself.


You mean cheap media. For drives, there are no cheap drives. Most DVD burners cost the same, even for Plextor, but there are cheap media and expensive media because cheap media are produced by Chinese and expensive media are produced by Japanese. Drives are mostly produced by Chinese.

If you look at the press releases carefully, the media don’t always come later but usually at the same time. It’s just that it takes a few more months to “copy” the media from the Japanese inventors who happen to be the drive makers as well. I mean, you wanted cheap media, you have to wait a little longer.

That was never repeated with non-memory semiconductor industry, especially the microprocessor industry where Intel has held a virtual monopoly for the last two decades. Mitsubishi of Japan tried. Samsung of South Korea tried. VIA of Taiwan tried. All of them failed. If it were as easy to copy a microprocessor and duplicate it by the millions as doing it with optical storage media like CD-R and DVD+R, the average price of P4-like processors would have fallen to US$10.


1- There are certainly expensive (Plextor) drives, and inexpensive (BTC, LiteOn, NEC) drives in the US depending on who rebundles them.

2- There is a company called AMD that has been very innovative over the last 4 or so years. This is why Intel has been forced to continue to innovate.

3- Where are you buying your 12x or 16x “expensive” media currently?


If it were as easy to copy a microprocessor and duplicate it by the millions as doing it with optical storage media like CD-R and DVD+R, the average price of P4-like processors would have fallen to US$10.

What about HDD’s Kenshin? I wonder why the prices of these things have not dropped dramatically yet (Is it too difficult to duplicate yet, or are the ‘cheaper’ countries already involved?).


I think scale of economy doesn’t affect much for the HDD’s. There may be too many processes for each unit to manufacture that require human involvement. But HDD prices have steadily fallen from like US$1000 to US$500 and to US$200 and now to under US$100. Also, yes, the HDD’s have been manufactured already in the “cheaper” countries like Thailand and Malaysia for more than a decade.

You know, when people buy Intel processors, much of the money go to Intel’s shareholders, especially with the Pentium 4 processors running at premium clocks. There is much room for price competitions but Intel does not allow it because it takes too much, usually billions of dollars, to make one fabrication plant and even though a few companies like Samsung and Mitsubishi are rich enough for such fabs to build, they lack the technological experiences and Intel-like culture. So far, only US companies have been good at leading the non-memory semiconductor industry, like HP, Cray Research, IBM, Intel, AMD, National Semiconductor, Sun Microsystems, etc. One of Samsung’s worst failures was the Alpha processors in the 1990s.


You forgot AMD’s not a key competitor to Intel. Intel’s main rivals have been Apple, Motorola, IBM, HP, Sun, etc. AMD had used Intel’s x86 architecture for a decade from 386 to 586 K5/K6. Intel was forced to innovate means Intel would have stopped releasing Northwood and Itaniums? Do you seriously think Intel would have stopped in front of much bigger companies like IBM and Motorola? Intel was only one-billion-dollar company around 1990 when IBM was already over 50-billion-dollar company and Motorola was a little behind IBM. Apple was actually bigger and running far better product cycles than Intel for long and it was with Intel’s success with PC microprocessors that was partly helped by Microsoft’s successful marketing of Windows OS products that made Intel make bigger profits than Apple, finally. Whether one likes or approves of Microsoft or Intel is another issue.

Intel needs AMD the same way GM needed Ford and Chrysler to make it look they are not a monopoly. What would happen if Intel lowered average prices of Prescott 3.6GHz today to US$50? Would Intel go bankrupt? I’m familiar to such strategies because I have observed what Samsung and LG have done for the pure sake of monopoly, breaking literally tens of thousands of smaller companies through various methods including bribing all key politicians and political parties by the bilions, no exaggeration, and even supporting killer dictators. That can’t happen in the United States which forced AT&T to split into multiple companies of Ma Bell and Baby Bells, but can happen in South Korea as the current state of South Korean economy can fully prove.

What are expensive 12x and 16x media? I don’t buy expensive media.


One thing you all must know about 16x burners is because of the way they burn that even 8x media will burn at much faster speeds than on a 8x burner…ive seen 7min. burns at 8x on one. :bigsmile: so its not just 16x that your getting which from what ive seen give you around 5 min. burns. :wink:

also from what ive seen you need very high bandwith to burn at 16x…ie your external laptop drive encloseres probably arnt gonna cut it (i struggled with my 3.2 gig. p4 laptop to get it to burn 8x external). so your gonna need atleast a p4 DESKTOP equivilent around 2.8 or greater ghz. to burn at 16x. :wink:


Right now INTEL is competing with AMD in the Desktop and server markets.
Both companies have different CPU architectures and by performance numbers AMD as chosen the right one.
It wins almost all benchmarks at desktop and all that with a lower price.

The time for INTEL to do all it wants with no loss is over, consumers are getting more informed.
Sure most market belongs to INTEL, but bout companies have got profit in the last quarter and AMD gain some market share especially due to servers.
If Intel continues to give shoots in is own foot things could change, just look at the last INTEL platform, pricier, with expensive DDR2 & PCI-E, also some heat and yield problems.
Of course AMD is not perfect but due to some innovations like 64bits CPU for desktops Cool & quiet and hardware virus protection AMD is providing some fierce competition, driving industry. What is quite amazing for a company with much less capital and market share as INTEL.

About 16x drives, I’m not planning to pay for a new drive just to save 1 minute, most media I use is still 4x due to price.
Only cheaper DL 4x media could make me change.
Is this going to happen before blu-ray?! Let’s hope not. :bigsmile:


I agree, Intel, from a technological point of view, is starting to struggle on the desktop front, and losing ground on the server front.

Their Centrino boards are uncontested right now though.


for laptops the centrinos are great for bandwith expecially for dvd writing. :wink:


more than 1 minute quicker friend more like 2 min. quicker if you take in the leadin and leadout times. :iagree: and im not saying go out and buy one if you have one now but if your thinking of upgrading from a 4x it may be wise to wait for a 16x dual layer. :wink:

and bluray is still up in the air fighting with other technologies so dont hold your breath on that one.

my prediction and ill quote this post at the end of the year to show you is that dl dvd media will be around 1$ each by the end of the year.


That is pretty optomistic… The waiting game begins :bigsmile:


A company losing ground on the server front rapidly advances in servers, workstations, supercomputers, personal computer desktops, personal computer laptops, and PDA all at once? Forget the fact you like AMD and you believe AMD processors are better and then try to look at the past and then the present and the future as a whole. Look at both companies, their history, their current shares, their future plans without prejudice or self-interest or whatever.

That AMD offers more for the same money than Intel has been known for more than one full decade. That hardly means anything more than VIA and SiS offer more at the same cost than Intel. Actually, the comparison between Intel and AMD is usually pointless because people who buy Intel buy Intel regardless of what AMD enthusiasts like to say and AMD people buy AMD the same way. I buy both usually since I have zero preference regarding brand and company names. The first processor I ever bought on my own expense was an AMD 386-40MHz and the last one was Intel Xeon 2.66GHz and AMD Athlon 64 2800+. I bought the last two on the same day.

From a technological point of view, AMD had to develop their own architecture because Intel no more allowed them to copy and sell their x86 processors using the same chipsets and motherboards. That really made VIA difficult since VIA had even less resources than AMD.


I’ll make this one very short since this is a recording hardware forum after all. That AMD has caught up with Intel is a myth only. There are two ways to look at some things. Fair or unfair.


AMD and Intel have a cross-licensing agreement. AMD can use Intel tech. and vice-versa, as long as they can reverse-engineer it (they won’t actually give the documents to the competitor…).

Now for years it was AMD chasing Intel’s tech. Now the iAMD64 (or whatever Intel’s calling it) is changing the tide. You want proof of how badly it’s affecting Intel? Just look at their roadmaps.

I agree that AMD has long been the uber-underdog in the desktop/server makets, only being looked at by enthusiasts and whatnot. But now everything’s tilting towards AMD: from Cray supercomputers to technology analysts. I’m not saying that AMD will soon be a huge part of the segments or that Intel will crumble into bankruptcy or some whacky imagination like that. But what AMD has done lately is the equivalent of making Intel shit in their pants.

On another topic, are the new Pioneers (or any 16x burner) actually out outside of Asia? How long does it usually take for those drives to come out Stateside/Canada?