Disk quality difference

I recently purchased two Dvd burners, one is a Benq 1650, the other is a Lite-on Sohw812s, an exterior drive. When I do a disk quality test there is a vast difference between the two results , the Ben is almost always’s in the 90’s whereas the Lite-on is in the 50’s area for the same disk, what one is usually more accurate? I have had mixed results, sometime the 90 ratings, when played have had pixelation , and the ones with a 50 score played perfectly.
Any guidelines for these tests?

Well, it could be a lot of things. Most here will say you should not compare scans from two different drives because the scan measures the drive’s ability to read the disc and one would expect different drives to read differently. Ignoring the fact that the 812 is a [I]very[/I] old drive and that there are fundamental differences between the way Liteon and BenQ measure errors, I would guess that you should recheck that you are scanning at 4X with the Liteon and 8X with the BenQ and then post the scans here and see what posters suggest.

Also try Transfer Rate Tests as an additional check on disc readability. (See Francksoy, I am sort of on your side)

I have owned both drives; I would trust the BenQ over the Liteon but not on TYG02 media.

My media is TYGO2.What make the difference?

BenQ drives have consistently shown scans on TYG02 media that are much better than Liteon scans. It is still up in the air as to the real cause, but it still is not a 90-50 discrepancy so something else is going on. The 90s are just a little optimistic. Are you scanning at the correct speed?

BTW, I never really got my 812 to deliver good burns, you should be burning the TYG02 on the BenQ at 8X and retire the Liteon or use it for ripping.

What would be a good grade for this test, also what is an acceptical score for the PI error message’s? How do you detremine the readings of a transfer rate test, sorry to keep asking these questions , I went on Nero to get these answer’s and as a newbie, I might have as well been trying to translate the Rosetta Stone.
T.I.A.
Jim

No need to apologize, we all had to start somewhere. Generally PIF errors are much more important than PIE as most players will tolerate much higher PIE than most of us. I think PIE’s upper limit is 280 but most disks that are good quality should be in the teens or twenties. With older drives, these values will be higher. I had an older Pioneer 107 that burned a ton of Prodisc S03s close to 100.

I like totals on PIE to be under 10,000 but a lot of good discs get up to 50,000 or so and most here don’t care about totals.

I do not pay attention to scores as they only track PIF, but anything above 90 is good. Below that it depends on what is going on.

TRT graphs should be a straight line, upward at an angle from the start speed to the end speed. Anything dropping from this is not perfect but a lot of slight bumps are not cause for concern.

There is a lot on both of these tests here.

Thank you very much for the info, helps a lot. One more. Is there a vast difference between a scan and a quick scan?

Scanning measure significantly more data points and is much better to use for disc to disc comparison. Quick scan measures only a few data points (you can adjust how many) and it is hard to say when it might be useful as it can miss a lot. I use DVD Shrink’s quick analysis if I want a quick scan of a disc’s readability.