i heard from my friend that benq drives are reporting only average of pif from 8 ecc blocks, is this true? if so, will it make 716a’s sum1 scanning better in terms of accuracy?
BenQ drives like the 1655 do use 8ECC scanning, whereas the Plextor 716a uses 1ECC. Using the term of ‘accuracy’ for scanning has been greatly debated in CDFreaks forums. The rule of thumb I use is that I scan the media in the same drive I burned it in (where the drive is capaable of scanning). What each drive reports on the scan will be different for many reasons… This is too complex to answer in one post, so I can only say you’ll have to do the reading to help you answer your doubts, as I myself am still reading and learning.
I beleive in terms of PIF 1ecc would be more accurate yes. but every drive scans diffently…what to look for is no big jumps…usually if you see it with 1ecc you will see it magnified with 8ecc(that why up to 16 PIF is acceptable at 8ecc)…thats why usually 4x CLV liteon scans with kprobe2 have lower PIFs than a scan with a 8x CAV benq drive and cdspeed…though they shouldnt be too different. if you slow down your scan speed to 4x on your cdspeed your results should be very close…though the standard here for comparing is 8x.
Saying all that, Usually with good burns/media you do not see a big difference between a 8x 8ecc and a 4x 1ecc scan (other than a small rise in PIFs at the end of the 8x ecc)…if you do see a big difference, usually that tells you that the burn/disk was not the greatest. hence why many of us scan with both liteons/plextors and with benqs.
But yes I beleive that plextor or liteons are better at scanning PIFs. Liteons do not scan jitter which is a shame because if they did I would only use kprobe2 to scan.
Read this forum: Media Testing/Identifying Software especially these threads:
as well as many other threads there.