DVR-215D vs. DVR-216D w/ MCC004 @ 16x

vbimport

#1

I need a “new hardware” fix, so I’ve decided to replace my Pioneer DVR-112D PATA drive with a new SATA model. I’ve searched the forum for comparisons in burn quality between the DVR-215D and the new DVR-216D, but most of the quality scans I find for the DVR-216 are using brands of media that I never use and are burned at 20x. I use Verbatim MCC004 exclusively and 16x is just fine with me, even though they would probably burn at higher speeds.

I know the DVR-215D is supposed to be an excellent burner, but is there any consensus yet on whether the new DVR-216D does as good a job with MCC004 at 16x? Right now, I can buy either one at about the same price, but I need to make the decision soon, before the 215 gets hard to find.

Which one would you get, right now?


#2

A lot of people have been asking that same question lately. I really don’t know what to tell you sorry. People are 50/50 right now.


#3

I’d say if you can find the Pioneer 215 buy it. You can always buy the 216 later should you need it.


#4

here are the latest 16x burns from the same user so comparing these scans eliminates alot of variables. from what ive read the 116/216 still needs firmware improvements. it may very well be an overall better drive but at the moment the firmware is lacking.

115

[ul][li]http://club.cdfreaks.com/2057553-post738.html
[/li][li]http://club.cdfreaks.com/2059413-post761.html[/ul]
[/li]
215

[ul][li]http://club.cdfreaks.com/2057092-post553.html
[/li][li]http://club.cdfreaks.com/2059402-post571.html[/ul]
[/li]
116

[ul][li]http://club.cdfreaks.com/2106339-post96.html
[/li][li]http://club.cdfreaks.com/2107694-post144.html[/ul]
[/li]
216

[ul][li]http://club.cdfreaks.com/2106355-post70.html
[/li][*]http://club.cdfreaks.com/2107532-post91.html[/ul]


#5

[QUOTE=DVD_ADDICT;2110386]I’d say if you can find the Pioneer 215 buy it. You can always buy the 216 later should you need it.[/QUOTE]

I agree 110% :iagree:


#6

from looking at the 115/215 burn graphs. just after a calibration there is a fairly level increase in burn speed. the buffer differentiates as little as 25% and the CPU level differentiates of 19%.

from looking at the 116/216 burn graphs. just after a calibration there is a spike in the burn speed. the buffer differentiates as much as 75% and the CPU level differentiates of 25%.

the CPU levels are close enough not to worry about, but the Device Buffer and calibration spikes are of concern.

Bursama, of course all these burns were done on the same system? or nearly similar system specs?


#7

Yes I did Same system :iagree: and
I start post scan sometime soon 215D / 216D ([B] 4.7.7.16 [/B]) :smiley:


#8

@troy512
Seems like the 116 has slightly better scans than the 216. I’ve noticed this before with other burners with the only difference being the interface.


#9

possible to Post some MKM DVD DL MIS scans of 115 & 116 ?


#10

I’ve had some problems with the 216D in the reading area. I’ve had some DVDs read with errors (not being able to rip) and then used the same DVDs on different drives (an LG GH22NS30 and Lite-on iHAS 422) and they both read properly giving me the rip. I have two of these 216D drives so I’m figuring this drive just doesn’t read as well as some others. Because of this, I don’t think I’m going to be buying any more Pioneer drives.

A good burner is important but so is the ability to read properly (and fast).