Best way to flash new 1620Pro's? -Problem-

vbimport

#1

Just got a pair of 1620Pro’s f/w B7H9. Flashed them to B7T9 (not in safe mode) and had problems.
Unit 1 experienced terminal write errors @16x on two consecutive discs (16x Ritek DVD+'s) though it was able to burn a similar disc at 8x. Unit 2 successfully burns @16x but does so in a rather slow 7 + mins. Seems like something is holding it back a little bit. I’m running a Dell 8400 with a 3 ghz. processor a 2 g. of ram so the system is almost assuredly not the issue. My old Phillips 8601’s could burn the same media in just over 6mins. so I"m using them as my system’s benchmark.

QUESTION: What is the best way to, for sure, get “good flashes” on these drives?

I’m sure this question has been asked 1,000 times already. If so, please be so kind as to direct me where to look. I’ve searched with little luck so far. As always, thanks very much for the help. :bow:


#2

You probably got a good flash. It’s pretty hard to get a bad one on the retail drive especially coming from “B” firmware and going directly to “B” firmware. Does that Dell have the Intel Application Accelerator drivers installed? If it does you might want to check into trying to uninstall them and burning again. That particular Intel application has been reported to cause conflicts with DVD Burning. :wink:


#3

-Braxas,
Thanks as always for the input. My flashed 8601’s had no problem with regards to software on my computer so, based on that, I think the issue lies within the new Benqs. It just seems odd that the new Benqs don’t like Ritek 16x+ media when the flashed Phillips/Benq (I was running B7P9 f/w on them) made and continue to make flawless burns @16x on that media. The scans of those discs were above average, not great, but the discs themselves played wonderfully on my Pioneer dvd player.

I’ll try flashing the new Pros to B7P9 and see what I can see. If they continue to be unable to burn successfully @16x or they burn too slowly, then I’ll just return them to TigerDirect and get my money back.

QUESTIONS: I realize this question is off-topic, but what burner do you like besides Benq. People seem to really like their NEC 3500’s. What’s your opinion? I see you have a NEC, what is “LIggy and Dees v.2B6 f/w”, is it different from factory f/w? Finally, is the 3500 the fanciest NEC or is there something beyond that? Thanks again. :slight_smile:


#4

The newest NEC, as far as I know is the 3520. I’d suggest the 3500 at this point in time as the 3520 is still relatively young. While disc to disc my 3500 almost matches the BenQ’s it’s still not quite as good although the difference is negligible. It’s a good drive and I like it. Liggy & Dee’s Firmware version 2 beta 6 is hacked firmware with rewritten write strategies that help media burn better in general - Quikee also has firmware that does similiar things but I’ve always had good luck with Liggy & Dee’s firmwares so continue to use them. :wink:

Just a thought on the 16x Ridata Discs you got from Tigerdirect. Maybe a write strategy swap would help - maybe to the CMC Mag M01 strategy or something of that nature. Just a thought - you can find more information on the other threads about MediaCodeSpeedEdit for the BenQ. I did this with OptodiscOR4’s and they burn nicely at 8x now. :smiley:


#5

I have to do some more research on write strategies before I attempt any swapping. When you say your NEC “almost matches” the BenQ, what do you mean. Do the discs view better when you play them or do they just produce better scans?


#6

BenQ discs burned in the BenQ and scanned in the BenQ provide better scans then when burned on the NEC and scanned on the BenQ by a small marginal. Discs from both drives playback flawlessly though. :slight_smile:


#7

I also have both BenQ 1620 and NEC 3500 drives installed in my system, so I will comment.

I agree with Braxas’s comments regarding the 3500. I think the BenQ will burn your discs slightly cleaner than the NEC, but perhaps only at speeds 12X or higher. I believe that this will only affect the scans, and not playability, since the difference in scan quality is not extreme.

I do most of my burns on the NEC now, since it has a couple of major advantage for me:

  1. The NEC 3500 reads written data back at 16X instead of the BenQ 1620’s more sedate 8X. It takes BenQ over 9:00 minutes to verify a burn while the NEC can do it in only 5:00. Since I almost always configure Nero to verify all of my written discs, this time saving is significant. We can hope that a future BenQ firmware release (hacked or otherwise) will correct this limitation, since the BenQ 1620 definitely has the ability to read discs at the full 16X.

  2. Hacked NEC 3500 firmware from this page http://freeweb.siol.net/tvajng/Quikee_FW.html allows me to burn cheap Prodisc -R S03 discs at 8X instead of the rated 4X. I can even burn them at 12X if I’m in a hurry and willing to accept a higher scanned error rate near the end of the burn - and even then the CDSpeed transfer rate test straight-lines up to 16X on the NEC. The burn quality is consistent, the scans are very good, and so far the discs read back fine in anything that I’ve tried them in.

I think that the NEC 3500 is an excellent choice for a second drive.