CDFreaks First Look at the NEC ND-3540A

The NEC ND-3540A First Look article is now online.

This article should have been up much sooner but we were investigating some of the results with NEC.

Thanks for the preview. It’s a pitty that a real review is not available yet :sad:

I suspect there still are issues with this drive which make that CDFreaks has not released a real review yet (the same holds for the Benq 1640 unfortunately).

Like many others I want to buy either the Nec 3540 or the Benq 1640.
I’m still waiting for the reviews to make up my choice.
We’ll just have to be more patient…

Not quite.
Full reviews take much longer since the amount of media tested increases more than ten-fold.
Don’t worry, we will of course have full reviews of the NEC ND-3540A and the BenQ 1640A. :smiley:

[joke] O nice… you will re review BenQ 1620 ? =)) [/joke]

The “first look” from Wesociety is better than a full review from some people working for different domain names. :slight_smile: I know a lot of paid reviewers and website owners that write DVD writer reviews of less tests, less pages, and no PIE/PIF scans.

Could we please have a head-to-head comparison of these two fine specimens?

Head to head?

You can compare the supported features, specifications and writing speed performance by reading the First Look articles.
First Look: BenQ DW1640 DVD burner
First Look: NEC ND-3540A DVD burner

Our full reviews on both drives will analyze burn quality with PI/PIF scans on LiteOn hardware and 16x transfer rate/read tests. At that time, you will be able to compare the writing quality “head to head”. :slight_smile:

On the full review, are you going to use FW 1.01 or 1.W3?

Official NEC firmware. :slight_smile:

I’ll just quote the responses that I wrote at the article’s page:

Reaction Posted by Ron the 2nd on 15 June 2005 - 21:26 | Moderated @ 1 |
And according to the picture it was manufacturered in May, not March…

Reaction Posted by Ron the 2nd on 15 June 2005 - 21:35 | Moderated @ 1 | [I]
Why does the name of the drive (in the system) begins with a “_” ? Meaning that the name is: “NEC DVD_RW ND-3540A"?
Why did the guys at NEC put this "
” at the beginning of the name?
(I myself have this drive, and also my drive has the _ in its name…)

I know that it’s not important - but I’m curious… [/I]

Reaction Posted by Wesociety on 16 June 2005 - 04:28 | Moderated @ 1 |
@Ron, thx for that. I’m not sure why they use an underscore in the drive ID string, but I shall ask NEC.

Hehe, i don’t think NEC would be pleased if the drive was reviewed with unofficial firmware. Or the management here for that matter. :slight_smile:

You have management :rolleyes: :rolleyes: say it aint so :rolleyes: :rolleyes: I so want to see this forum as a bunch of aging hippies with ideals. :bow: :bow:

Nice work, but you should use .png for more clear shots, usually size is smaller than with .jpg too for text/apps. For photos .jpg is better.

Yes, testing them on the same platform, with the same media and comparing the results against each other.
Two drives reviewed in the same article. Why should it be a problem?

Unfortunately, you tested the drives with different hardware (and possibly different media).

So far, I can see the following differences:

Average             BenQ                NEC
-------             ----                ---
Pressed CD read     35.57X              34.19X
CD-R read           36.41X              35.66X
CD-RW read          30.64X              31.43X
Audio CD read       37.29X              30.95X
99min CD read       38.17X               --
DVD video read      11.95X              5.99X
DVD video DL read   9.02X               5.46X
DVD ROM read         ??                 11.90X
DVD+R read          12.07X              11.92X
DVD+RW read         9.33X               9.90X
DVD-R read          12.07X              11.99X
DVD-RW read         9.33X               9.88X
DVD+R9 read         9.05X               5.46X
DVD-R9 read          --                 5.47X
CD-R Write          35.02X (2:59)       36.65X (2:46)
CD-RW write         30X (3:10 P-CAV)    29.58X (3:07 Z-CLV)
DVD+R Write         11.4X (5:46)        11.82X (5:53)
DVD+RW Write        7.7X (7:51)         8X (7:18)
DVD+R Write         11.28X (6:07)       11.78X (5:54)
DVD+RW Write        5.90X (10:28)       5.79X (10:38)
DVD+R9 write        7.5X (15:04 P-CAV)  6.54X (18:31 Z-CLV) [issues]
DVD-R9 write         --                 5.65X (20:42 Z-CLV) [issues]

DVD access time     120ms               140ms

@alexo, thanks for the comparison table!

Our review team will consider doing a head-to-head article. :slight_smile:
But as I stated earlier, once the full reviews are published, you should be able to make some good comparisons between the two drives.

The S-B-S Comparison is impressive but couldn’t NEC’s drive by Flashed with new Firmware to give it better numbers?

I’m a newbie and I’m confused. Is the 3540 and 3540A the same?

Perhaps, but somebody has to test it, no?

Here’s a summary of a BenQ review:


I just ordered the 3450 from newegg. $50 shipped was to difficult to turn down. Given the success with the 3500, I’m hoping the 3450 turns out just as good.