LTR-52327S burning tests, part 2



Here’s the CDR that came bundled with the 7S drive:

Drive Type = CD-RW
Disc Type = CDR (A+)
Lead In = 97:26:66
Lead Out = 79:59:71
Nominal = 702.82MB (79m 59s 71f/LBA:359846)
Manufacturer = CMC Magnetics Corporation
Cur. Speed = Wrt(52X),Rd(52X)

Burned at 52x:

Reading in the 6S drive:


New drive is in, this is a retail drive, it came with firmware QS04 installed, and a mfg date of June 2003. The drive came bundled with Nero Express, and included a Verbatim US-24x RW disc and the usual LiteOn CDR.
This new chipset appears to be reporting errors differently than the 6S chip, so I am including a comparison scan, for each disc, that is done on the 6S drive. I hope this is not too tedious, but I think it’s good informarion since we are all familiar with how the 6S reports errors.
As with the previous drive I had, this drive is cutting the time it takes to load and spin up a disc by nearly 1/2, in comparison to earlier drives. This is very nice, and helps to eliminate one of the most time-consuming aspects of burning. All 52x burns are completed in about 2:40, and the drive is finishing the entire burn (lead-out too) at full speed, with a max of about 51.7x indicated in Nero.

So, here’s some tests:

TY 48x burned at 52x:

and reading in the 6S drive:

TY 48x burned at 40x:

and reading in the 6S drive:

RiTEC TG (TDK) 48x burned at 52x:

and reading in the 6S drive:

RiTEC TG (TDK) 48x burned at 40x:

and reading in the 6S drive:

Verbatim 48x (made in Mexico) burned at 52x:

and reading in the 6S:

Verbatim 48x burned at 40x:

reading in the 6S:

Sony 48x burned at 40x:
As you may know, SmartBurn will not burn Sony faster than 40x.

reading in the 6S:

Maxell 40x (an older RiTEK TG) burned at 52x:

reading in the 6S:

Memorex Black 40x burned at 52x:

reading in the 6S:

Using the comparison scans in the 6S drive to compare performance, it appears that the 7S is either reporting more errors, or it is not quite as “good” of a reader as the 6S. I leave it to someone smarter than me to decide that. It may be a combination of those 2 things. But, burning performance appears to be better than my 6S on a wider range of media, and certainly faster at 52x than my 6S has ever been. (due to the fact that it burns full speed on all media at 52x). It certainly has no trouble with the Verbatim 48x media, which my 6S has never “liked”.


Verbatim US 24x RW media (bundled with the drive) at 24x:
This drive burns the 24x RW in 3:40, much faster than the 6S, and will do a full erase in about 3:50.
Important note: this drive only offers 16x and 24x burn speeds on US media, the 6S offers 10x, 16x, and 24x.

reading in the 6S:

Verbatim US burned at 16x

reading in the 6S:

now for some fun:
Memorex (Infodisc) US 24x RW, burned at 24x:

No doubt about how this drive feels about Infodisc!
Results of scanning in the 6S were similar, I won’t waste any more bandwidth on this media.

Maxell HS RW burned at 12x:
This drive offers 12x, 10x, 8x and 4x speeds on HS media.

Reading in the 6S:

TDK HS burned at 12x:

reading in the 6S:

Sony HS RW burned at 10x:
The drive will not allow more than 10x write speed on this media.

Over all, this drive shows slightly lower quality on the US media than the 6S drive, but the difference may not be significant in every-day use. On HS RW media the quality is much improved over the 6S. These are the best HS error scans I’ve ever seen on any LiteOn drive, by far.


Being read in the ltr-52327s it looks terrible. Being read in the ltr-52246s it looks pretty good. What are we supposed to trust? I don’t suppose you have a premium that you could test it on as well?


Now that you have your replacement drive could you test it to see if it’s a 3-sheep drive?



can’t you just take it at face value that 52246S is a better reader of the two?


Sorry, couldn’t resist :stuck_out_tongue:

Honestly, very interesting results and I tip my hat to you for making the tests.

The results are still in the range of same order of magnitude for both Average count, total count and Max value of C1 as well as number of C2.

As such, I don’t think the differences are that big and could be just down to statistical variance in quality control.

However, whether one of the drives is more accurate (and not just a worse reader) is an interesting question. The frequency of reported errors on the graph makes me want to draw a hasty conclusion that 52327S is reporting C1/C2 data back at a higher frequency than 52246S.

Could we set up a test to gauge this?

I should get a 52327S as well, but I’m running out of PATA-ports on my machine (not to mention time on my calendar).




Excellent testing! Thanks for posting your results. :slight_smile:

Seems LiteON drives haven’t ever liked (since 16x and maybe earlier drives) and still don’t like Memorex/Infodisc HS RW media. They do read back fine on my LiteON 32132S though (with low C1 errors and no C2 errors), when burned with a non-LiteON burner.


And what if you would try to lower the reading speed? It might be that your 7S drive acts somehow different from 6S then reading at max speed. Try to lower it to something like 40x. It woun’t hurt and it might help to get those results similar to the ones of 6S drive.


I note that on some disc, the 2 drives report very similar results, while on others they differ. I strongly suspect that the error reporting is different. As for testing at lower speeds, that’s a good idea. As I said, It’s probably a combination of things, but the 6S certainly has no trouble reading the discs.

Considering the greatly improved speeds and very consistant quality, I give this drive 2 thumbs up. :bigsmile:


Here’s a few scans at lower speeds on some of the same discs:

TY 48x burned at 40x, scanned at “8x” ( which we now know is actually 4x in KProbe)

and again in the 6S drive:

TY 48x burned at 52x, scanned at 12x:

reading in the 6S:

Finally, TDK (RiTEK TG), 48x burned at 52x, scanned at 24x:

reading in the 6S:


by request:
I burned 2 TDK 48x CDR’s (RiTEK TG), one in each drive at 40x, simultaneoulsy, using Nero’s multiple drive option. I chose 40x to eliminate the differnces in the drives 52x burn ability, as the 6S will not complete a burn at 52x, (without downshifting), on this media, which would make the comparison meaningless.
For comparison purposes, I’ve fixed the KProbe graph at 15, with read speed set at 32x in v-1.1.14. Each disc is read first in it’s burning drive, then in the other drive.

Disc burned in 7S, read in 7S:

Disc burned in 6S, read in 6S:

Disc burned in 6S, reading in 7S:

Disc burned in 7S, reading in 6S:

It appears to me that at 40x burn, the 6S has a very slight advantage in both burn quality and read quality, but I’m not sure that the differences are significant.

As I see it, the disc burned in the 6S was read very much the same by both the 6S and the 7S, which may suggest that these 2 drives do, in fact, report errors in the same way.
Similarly, the disc burned in the 7S is read very much the same in both drives, again the differences are very slight.

Although the differences are probably not significant from a statistical perspective, they are consistantly different in this case.


So have you come to any conclusions on which is the better drive? The LTR-52327S or the LTR-522466S?


Originally posted by Sgt_Strider
So have you come to any conclusions on which is the better drive? The LTR-52327S or the LTR-522466S?

I think its to early to say which drive is better… (firmware still improves on the 7S drive)

Judging from the first results i would say the drives have both their strong points, but for now the 6S burning quality seems to be a bit better.

Its hard to say which one to buy right now.
Probably the 7S for “future upgradebility”.

But say, that would not be possible anymore (to what speeds could you possible ‘upgrade’ anyway), i would get a 6S drive.

Note: Above is just my personal opinion when i look at the C1/C2 scans right now.
Its best to ‘study’ them yourself so you can decide for yourself. :slight_smile:


Here’s the same test only with the burn speed changed to 48x. This allows a comparison of full CAV burn performance. The 6S completed the burn at full 48x, it will not do this at 52x.

Burned in 7S, read in 7S:

burned in 6S, read in 6S:

Burned in 6S, read in 7S:

Burned in 7S, read in 6S:

It appears that the 7S has taken a slight lead in burn quality, but remains slightly behind in read quality. The 6S reads both discs slightly better than the 7S, but in this case, the 7S is reading it’s own burn better than the 6S reads IT’S own burn, which further confirms that they are reporting errors very much alike and that this 6S is just a slightly better reader.

Which is the better drive? Depends on what you mean by “better”. The 7S clearly has a strong lead in flat-out 52x burning, and produces acceptable discs with a wide range of media, where the 6S generally will not. Some people report that their 6S drives will do the same thing at 52x as this 7S is doing, but I have not seen this with mine. So, these differences might well be due to normal variation between drives. In that case, the answer is that they are both excellent drives. But that presumes that the user takes the time to find a drive’s “sweet spot” for the best speed on a given media. You cannot ignore the interaction between drive and media and burn speed and read speed and etc, etc, etc. This 7S appears to like RiTEK and Mitsubishi media better than TY, which is something of a switch from the 6S.

I feel stronger now that this 7S has improved running laser calibration at high speed than the 6S has, but again is that because it’s a better design or it it because it was built on Tuesday instead of Friday? I will reserve judgement until LiteOn has released a few F/W updates on the 7S.


Originally posted by rdgrimes
Considering the greatly improved speeds and very consistant quality, I give this drive 2 thumbs up. :bigsmile:

Now where’s my credit card…


Hey Rdgrimes, I’m wondering if you can also do a slow speed test on both of these drives? Like at 2x or 4x? If you can, that would be awesome! Thx :slight_smile:


wondering if you can also do a slow speed test on both of these drives?

700MB file, burned at 4x in each drive, reading in the same drive:

Not very impressive…here’s the same discs reading at 24x:


You’re right, it does sucks


The drive came bundled with Nero Express, and included a Verbatim US-24x RW disc and the usual LiteOn CDR.
Do you say that they finally learned that bundling InfoDisc or Plasmon CD-RW media is a bad idea? :bigsmile:


@rdgrimes, You’ve got to much time left!! :stuck_out_tongue: :stuck_out_tongue:

Great job.