Best Lite-On CD-RW Model Recommendations?

I’m looking to buy a new CD-RW drive that is able to easily make reliable 1:1 backups of as many different types of copy-protected CD’s as possible (in particular, Securom NEW and SafeDisc2, but the more the better). I’ve had a lot of problems backing up some of my CD’s with my TDK 24/10/40B (particularly Securom NEW titles), and I really want a burner that will make my life easier!

I’ve heard a lot of good things about Lite-On’s lineup on this forum and elsewhere, so it seems that one of the newer Lite-On models (32X or faster, as I’ve heard the 24X models have problems with Securom NEW) is probably the best way to go.

I was looking around on Lite-On’s website, and I’ve noticed that there seem to be two models for each speed, ending in “W” or “S” (e. g. LTR-40125S and LTR-40125W; LTR-48125W and LTR-48126S, etc.).

One of my primary questions is, what is the difference between the two models, “W” and “S”? Is one better than the other? :confused: I couldn’t really find any specifics on the differences on Lite-On’s website.

My other question is, which model would you recommend? My thinking was that the newer models would be more likely able to do 1:1 copies of more types of copy-protected CD’s, as well as being supported longer than older models…so right now I’m leaning towards one of the 40X or 48X models. What do you think? I would greatly appreciate any feedback anyone has to offer.

48126S might be upgradeable to 48246S, or even 52326S.

All the xxxx5x are the same. You can convert them into each other.

Originally posted by Bucho
[B]I’m looking to buy a new CD-RW drive that is able to easily make reliable 1:1 backups of as many different types of copy-protected CD’s as possible (in particular, Securom NEW and SafeDisc2, but the more the better). I’ve had a lot of problems backing up some of my CD’s with my TDK 24/10/40B (particularly Securom NEW titles), and I really want a burner that will make my life easier!

I’ve heard a lot of good things about Lite-On’s lineup on this forum and elsewhere, so it seems that one of the newer Lite-On models (32X or faster, as I’ve heard the 24X models have problems with Securom NEW) is probably the best way to go.

I was looking around on Lite-On’s website, and I’ve noticed that there seem to be two models for each speed, ending in “W” or “S” (e. g. LTR-40125S and LTR-40125W; LTR-48125W and LTR-48126S, etc.).

One of my primary questions is, what is the difference between the two models, “W” and “S”? Is one better than the other? :confused: I couldn’t really find any specifics on the differences on Lite-On’s website.

My other question is, which model would you recommend? My thinking was that the newer models would be more likely able to do 1:1 copies of more types of copy-protected CD’s, as well as being supported longer than older models…so right now I’m leaning towards one of the 40X or 48X models. What do you think? I would greatly appreciate any feedback anyone has to offer. [/B]

My opinion:Go for the LTR-48125S
it’s upgradeable i think… the LTR-48125W is not…

Yes all LTR-xxxx5x is “the same” hardware.

If you want the newest hardware, try to get a LTR-xxxx6x drive…since this one is newer hardware/newer chipset.

I would recommend the LTR-40125S and then with the firmware update you are able to hit 48X buring.

I have just realized that (thx all the expert educating me):

if u want a 48x, then buy the cheapest one 32125W and upgrade the firmware to exactly the same thing as 48125W!

:D(coz 48125W=32125W hardware but only different firmware):smiley:

if u want a further upgradeable like 52x and 24x cdrw… then go for lastest 48126S…:eek: :eek:

O/C Freak said:.

If you want the newest hardware, try to get a LTR-xxxx6x drive…since this one is newer hardware/newer chipset.

Anybody seen one yet? What about the TDK? Is it a Litey?

Originally posted by raykam
[B]I have just realized that (thx all the expert educating me):

if u want a 48x, then buy the cheapest one 32125W and upgrade the firmware to exactly the same thing as 48125W!

:D(coz 48125W=32125W hardware but only different firmware):smiley:
[/B]

Yes, but we don’t know for sure if there is not a production quality difference between the 32X and the true 48X. As has been discussed recently, however, the main difference may just be in the warranty service policies. If your 48X doesn’t do 48X, you can get warranty service, but if your overclocked 32X doesn’t, tough luck.

You decide…

Sure. At least no one here has proven the opposite…so far

I appreciate all the help so far. So to sum up, am I correct in saying there really isn’t a difference between the LTR-xxxxxW and LTR-xxxxxS? It sounds as if the number preceeding the W or S determines the hardware generation of the drive (please correct me if I am wrong on this). Still, I am curious as to what the significance of the letters are…does anyone know?

Does anyone have any experience with the newer LTR-xxxx6x generation (the only one I know of is the LTR-48126S)? Are they any more accurate than the LTR-xxxx5x generation of hardware? Currently, I’m leaning towards the LTR-32125W to keep cost down, but if the LTR-48126S would be substantially better, I would be less reserved in shelling out the extra cash for it. Anyone have any thoughts on this?

I’m not sure you should ask oc-freak but difference is in writing mode(zone clv, partial cav, etc.) I honestly don’t remember what 's sure is that s version usually are out before w version. All lite-on drives in stores arrived first in s version than w.

Have you seen it being sold somewhere yet ?

The new TDK 48/24/48 is based on the new Liter-On LTR-48246 hardware…

The TDK is for sale now, but I’ve not seen the Lite-On for sale yet.

With all the uncertainty about whether how stable an overclocked drive is, I decided to check the board on my LTR-40125S. When I opened it up, printed on the board was 32125S, so to those wanting to overclock their 32X drives, there is no question. Has anyone checked what is printed on the boards in their 48X drives?

32125s or 32123s? Where did you get the 5 from.:eek:
What is the difference if any.

Regards Ukunz.

Well, I have 4 high quality photos showing that inside my 40125S is 32123S.
The photos have been shown to at least 3 CDFreaks’ top-positioned residents who have expressed nothing but surprise !
Besides, I wrote about it here club.cdfreaks.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=50433

If anybody wants to take a look at them, just let me know by PM or e-mail.

Yes, I accidently put a 5 in as the last number after reading the previous posts where you and others quoted the same thing, but with the “W” series.

So if you had pictures, why didn’t you say so before or post them in this thread so I wouldn’t have had to taken mine apart?

Anyway it wasn’t a total waste of time because I found out that the Lite-On uses the same chipset as the ASUS 40x. According to cdrinfo.com that drive can’t be overclocked. So this may mean long-term problems with an overclocked Lite-On drive or burned discs.

Originally posted by Voyager74656
Anyway it wasn’t a total waste of time because I found out that the Lite-On uses the same chipset as the ASUS 40x. According to cdrinfo.com that drive can’t be overclocked. So this may mean long-term problems with an overclocked Lite-On drive or burned discs.

I’m not quite sure I follow that logic… if it’s only the chipset that they have in common, then why would the maximum speed of one drive be related to the other? :confused:

Originally posted by Darin

I’m not quite sure I follow that logic… if it’s only the chipset that they have in common, then why would the maximum speed of one drive be related to the other? :confused:

Obviously for the same reason that you can’t overclock a processor or memory beyond a limited range(without buying expensive cooling hardware). You should know that memory has a certain “speed” and if the 32X and 40X drives use a slower memory than the 48X drives you could end up writing bad bits if the memory isn’t fast enough. :stuck_out_tongue:

Try it with your video card. I can overclock the memory on mine to 233Mhz from 166Mhz, but if I move a window too fast it messes up the screen because the memory can’t handle the bandwidth.

Since Asus chose a newer chipset in the 48X drives rather than overclocking the old one may be because the old one isn’t stable writing at 48X, or it may simply be because the new chipset added 16X rewrite. I don’t know, if you do let me know. Otherwise I’m not going to trust burning at 48X for anything important.

Originally posted by Voyager74656
Obviously for the same reason that you can’t overclock a processor or memory beyond a limited range(without buying expensive cooling hardware)…

The problem is you are comparing a single component (in this case a CPU) to an entire drive. You can take a certain computer, and not be able to overclock it because the motherboard does not offer the FSB speeds needed, while the CPU itself could be very overclockable in a different system.

The same can be said for drives… we know that the chipset in question supports higher speeds, but that doesn’t mean that the other components do. Another issue is going to be available firmware. Taken from the FAQ on this board:

Q: Could I flash my brand X into brand X just because they use the same chipset? (Like Lite-On to asus or asus to Lite-On)
A: No, even if they use the same chipset they are totally different designed so that is impossible.

If they use the same chipset, but aren’t the same drive, then you may not be able to overlclock the Asus due to lack of compatible firmware written for higher speeds. Just because there is not firmware available to overclock the Asus drive doesn’t mean that the chipset can’t handle higher spees than Asus has used. For example, MAYBE Asus uses different motors, or lasers, that can’t handle that speed. Or maybe they just decided to use the newer chipset for their 48x drive.

At this point, it’s conjecture for you or I to try to determine why Asus changed chip sets for their latest drive. There are definitely some quality problems with the LiteOns at 48X, but at this point it’s hard to say whether or not that’s because of immature firmware, lack of quality high speed media, or because they are pushing the existing hardware too hard. I’m just saying that we don’t have enough info to be able to draw any correlation between the speed of the Asus drive, and the life expectancy of an overclocked Lite-On that happens to use the same chipset.