ImgBurn better than Nero 6?

I’ve just bought a NEC ND-3550A drive and I’ve tested three different media as well as different burning programs and I’ve found some interesting conclusion.

I burned a couple of images with Nero 6 (latest version updated from Ahead’s site) and the quality scans and benchmarks with Nero CD/DVD Speed aren’t that great. I’ve found that the reading curve has some issues sometimes as well as the quality scan shows a high range of errors. I know that the NEC 3550 isn’t a great scanner, so I kept this under consderation.

Next I ran a burn test with Nero CD/DVD Speed and the results of the burned disc were much better. I then tried to burn a test image with Nero CD/DVD Speed (there’s an option to use a file instead of randomly generated data in the Settings) and the quality was also much better than using Nero itself.

The next test was with ImgBurn of Lightning UK, and the result was pretty much the same - a solid burn with a perfect reading curve and a relatively steady PIE/PIF scan (i.e. no huge error curves at end of disc etc.)

I’ll do more tests to make sure it’s not an isolated case, but it seems to me that ImgBurn creates better (I’d say much better) burns than Nero, which I thought was king of burning apps. Like I said I don’t have another drive with which to do quality scans such as a more dependable LightOn or BenQ scanner, but I can at least use ND-3550 to compare results from the same drive.

Anyone noticed this? Hopefully this is in the right forum, even though I know it’s software specific, it is also regarding a specific drive, the NEC ND-3550A.

Without doubt, and not only when you compare their prices.

If all you want to do is burn ISO’s, BINs etc, IMGBURN has the value factor. :cop:

In my experience the program used for burning does not seem to make a difference. The burning program talks to the software interface and the software interface takes it from there. It’s only if the program chokes and doesn’t give the interface the data and the “burn proof” technology kicks in that one will see spikes. (IMO)

it definitely does. ive used Nero and ImgBurn, and ImgBurn consistantly has noticably better burn quality.

I definitely agree with you, kdshapiro. :iagree: If there are no “boundary-conditions” (buffer-underruns and so on), the quality of the burn is related only to the burner and the media.

Regards, :slight_smile: