DW1650 crossflashing to DW1655?

vbimport

#1

I wanna know if anyone ever tried it and if so, if it was successful, i.e. the LS abilities are working.

Thanks in Advance :slight_smile:


#2

Nope. The hardware for LS is just not there.


#3

So what about improvements on the burning abilities? The opinions on whether the 1655 or the 1650 is better diverge a lot so perhaps people that have troubles with their 1650 could get better burns with the 1655 fw. Just guessing here…

My DW1650 arrives in 2h, can barely wait :stuck_out_tongue:


#4

You cant cross flash, the firmware wont let you, just tried it with my 1650.


#5

Even with BQFlasher?


#6

I don’t get all the hoopla over LS anyway, it fades after a year and it takes forever to burn the label and the discs cost more. They need to vastly improve the technology and concept.

Good luck with your 1650, hope you enjoy it more than the 24hrs that I did with my new one this week :frowning:

To be honest I still don’t know if it’s the drive or maybe my power supply, it’s being strangely inconsistant.


#7

Mine just arrived, I already started scanning some media I had burned on the LG 4167 and I already came to a conclusion: either my dad’s Samsung TS-H552B is a great scanner or it’s this one that sucks because on the same media, I get max 2 PI Failures on the Samsung and spikes of 8 PIF on the BenQ. Weird stuff.

About your case, well, I’ve been following all the threads that concern BenQ on the last couple of days and I’d really give it a go on another computer, a X2 is really a power eater (two cores, double the juice, double the load, not linearly but almost), or if you can afford it get an OCZ power supply of like 600W. Should be more than enough.


#8

Hi :slight_smile:
Oh yes you can! I know. I’ve done it.
BenQ 1650 > 1655 no LS as no h/w support.
… 1655 > 1650 no LS as no f/w support.
BenQ 1650/1655 > Philips 1666 (this is not a LS model).
Philips 1666 > BenQ 1650/1655.
I have personally done all of the above using Quikees BQFlasher. :bow:


#9

And by your experiences, have you noticed any improvement at all on the burning quality by flashing from 1650 to 1655?

Thanks everyone for your input :smiley:


#10

Hi :slight_smile:
There are differences in the f/w, but it’s marginal. Also a case of win some lose some. By this I mean 1 f/w may favour - media & the other + media. But then this is reversed with RW media. In scanning terms 1 may give better results, but in this it can often be cosmetic. Having little if any real value. Hence my return to the recommended f/w for the respective drives. If you only use + media it may suit you to crossflash. But as there are so many variables this can only be seen by trial & error on your setup. At present unless you really need something to take up your time there’s probably little point.(Not enough f/w options/variation).


#11

This is pretty normal, as these drives scan different ECC sums. A PIF of 4 on a MediaTek chipset drive is almost equivalent to a PIF of 16 on a Benq drive. You find the technical details in the thread about scanning.


#12

Well I guess that reading never hurt anyone, just booked myself a trip to that thread, thanks for the explanation :wink:


#13

In other words; [I]pointless… [/I]:bigsmile:
LightScribe requires hardware present in drive, that can never be cured by firmware. Facts gentlemens.


#14

In other words gentlemen (the plural of gentleman). :stuck_out_tongue:

I just asked because it happened in the past (not just with DVD drives!) that some pieces of hardware get some functions disabled and are sold as cheaper and “weaker” models.

I remember for example of some AMD CPUs that had some cache disabled and you could enable it by short-circuiting two bridges, and for example Pioneer’s 111 (if I’m not mistaken) that according to some rumours will be able to do both LS and LF by firmware flashing.

Just thought that perhaps dw1650 could have the hardware there, just disabled. :slight_smile:


#15

As for the lightscribe, yes it’s “pointless”. But perhaps if BenQ stops releasing firmwares for one drive (like the case of DW1625 vs DW1620) then crossflashing DW1650 to DW1655 or vice versa will be “pointful” in the future. :bigsmile:


#16

Hi :slight_smile:
I believe in the post #8 re crossflashing in this thread I made that fairly clear.
Didn’t I see a post of yours saying something about reading threads? :stuck_out_tongue:
Or was you post meant as confirmation. If so, sorry. :doh:
@
EspinhaT,
"Just thought that perhaps dw1650 could have the hardware there, just disabled.“
What did you think this was a NEC clone? :bigsmile:
@
zevia
"But perhaps if BenQ stops releasing firmwares for one drive (like the case of DW1625 vs DW1620) then crossflashing DW1650 to DW1655 or vice versa will be “pointful” in the future.” :bigsmile:
My point exactly never rule anything out. :iagree:


#17

Yeah, it was meant just as a confirmation :slight_smile:


#18

Have you tried speed patching the 1650 and burning at 8x? Ive seen people having problems with speed patching their 1650 and burning at 8x, heck even 6x. I couldnt get it to work with my comp and i did it all to a T. Surely if I can get a 93% burn when burning at 2.4x i can get a decent burn at 6x as opposed to coasters?


#19

I’ve read all the posts, but I don’t have understood if it’s possible to crossflash dw1650 drive to 1655 and then use LS function! Can You say somenthing about it? I trust on you!!!


#20

You’ve read all the posts?.. what about this one, first reply:

:bigsmile:

Then:
"LightScribe requires hardware present in drive, that can never be cured by firmware. Facts gentlemens."
And: “it’s pointless”.

What’s the part you don’t get? :slight_smile: