Newbie to DVD writers and Benq



Hi all,

I am new to DVD burner not to mention BenQ. Thanks to this forum, I successfully flashed by BenQ 1620A OEM into retail. But, I am still overwhelmed by all the information on this website. I was hoping someone can spell out a few things for me while I continue to take in all the information from this forum.

  1. With the retail firmware B7V9, is my BenQ capable of 4x DL burning?

  2. I know people burn pass rated burn speeds of DVDs. Is this largely done with MediaCodeSpeedEdit? Is there other software to look into?

  3. What software is used to check the burn quality of DVDs?

  4. Finally, what other fun stuff can I do with the drive???

Any info is greatly appreciated!! Thanks!!


:wink: read the FAQ thread:

Use NERO CD/DVD SPEED for scans to test discs.


Thanks for the reply. I have been working through the FAQ and the media FAQ as well. I did a scan and got the following results. How are these results for a BenQ 1620? Thanks in advance,

General Information
Drive: BENQ DVD DD DW1620
Firmware: B7V9
Disc: DVD-R (TYG01)
Selected speed: 8 X
PI errors
Maximum: 9
Average: 1.14
Total: 7662
PI failures
Maximum: 5
Average: 0.06
Total: 532
PO failures: 0
Maximum: 8.2 %
Average: 7.04 %
Scanning Statistics
Elapsed time: 8:49
Numer of samples: 15435
Average scanning interval: 8.00 ECC
Glitches removed: 0


That’s excellent quality. You are using top-notch media and you have a drive that functions very well.


I’m trying to interpret the results properly and found the following description:

PI (Parity Inner): No larger areas on the disc should exceed 280 PI errors, do not worry too much about high single spikes that exceeds 280.
PO (Parity Outer): No larger areas on the disc should exceed 32 PO (actually PI uncorrectable) errors, do not worry too much about high single spikes that exceeds 32. (Note that this is not completely correct according to the standards, but is still a good guideline, read the first technical post if you wonder why this is not a 100% correct way of reading the results compared to the standards).

When the above says PI should not exceed 280 errors, does this correspond with PI maximum errors (9 in my case). And PO errors corresponds to PO failures (0 in my case). What does Jitter and the PI “failures” category tell me? Finally, it seems very good, but I am interested if it can be better and if it is worth the effort to make it better (like by dropping the write speed)?



These are rough guidelines for judging quality at 1x. The number of PI errors and failures (both of which are correctable and thus harmless up to a certain amount) grows at faster reading speeds.

Your scan is far below acceptable PI error levels (9 vs. ~280) and PI failures (5 vs. 16-32) and the total numbers of errors and failures are very low; this allowed me to say you have an excellent burn without seeing the full scans.

You don’t need to lower your writing speed, unless you are a complete perfectionist.

Take a look at other threads where scans are posted and compare if you want to see how similar TYG01 media burns in other 1620s. Here are some scans to show you how I would rank quality. Top to bottom:

1, exceptional. Under 100 total PIF, maximum 3.
2, excellent. Under 500 total PIE, maximum 6. This is probably the most similar to what you have.
3, good. Some clustering of errors at the end, but nearly all readers and players would have no problem reading that.
4, marginal. Jitter and PI errors growing at the outer edge, significant amount of PI failures at the end that may interfere with reading. The disc is perfectly readable, however, it might not be in another drive. I wouldn’t trust it for critical data. In fact, I never trust any single disc for critical data :slight_smile:


Wow. Thanks Agent009. That was very informative and useful.

Semi-related to this matter, I bought TY’s for the purpose of backing up sem-important to important data that I would keep for a long time. I am interested in these error readings for the purpose that I did a good burn thinking it will slow the deterioration of the DVD. Is this a good expectation?

Also, how long would I expect my data to be readable and safe for on these TY’s (DVD-R 5.7gig values).



Don’t know, somewhere between a few months and a few decades… How long will be a function of dye quality, disc construction, exposure to light, temperature, humidity, and general luck or lack thereof. It’s a lottery, basically :slight_smile:

If you value the data, make an extra copy on different media and store it at a different location.

Yes, scanning will tell how media deteriorates over time. Keep your discs and scan screenshots numbered or otherwise organized and you can make observations over time. I sometimes sample old media and I had to re-burn data on new media a couple of times when 2-3 year old Verbatim and Ricoh media showed signs of significant deterioration. Typically, if you see one disc going bad, chances are more from the same pack are bad as well, so detecting such discs through sampling is not as much work as it may sound.



I’ve been doing scans of all the dvds I burn. I noticed that I always have the most PI errors near the beginning of the DVD. Any ideas why this might be the case?



I wouldn’t read too much into that, given that your PIEs are below 10 over the entire disc. One possible reason could be that during an 8x burn the disc rotates at 9000 rpm in the beginning, then gradually slows down to about 4500 rpm at the end. See the yellow line in this writing graph. Higher rpms -> more vibration -> less precise writing -> more scattered bit errors during reading -> more PIEs counted during the scan. This doesn’t show up as more PIFs because to get PI failures you need much larger bursts of bit errors. Or it could be slightly uneven dye density over the disc surface. In either case, the effect you are observing is extremely minor and I can’t imagine it affecting readability in any meaningful way.


Thanks for your reply,

It is pretty weird because I get the first 4 PIFs during the beginning and for the rest of the DVD, I get only 1 additional PIF. It seems like I can be burning much better.