Pioneer 216 DBK VS Samsung 223F

vbimport

#1

I will burn enough media (that I have found) at the maximum speed that each drive supports for that media. If a drive support it at a lower speed then both burns will be at the lower speed. This is a high speed results test and not a pure good quality test. As we know the Pioneer drive has more mature firmware than 223F. I have tested 212 at the past and for me it wasn’t good. The same goes for 223F that as for now it doesn’t have good results at CD/DVD Speed. But all the DVD’s I have burned even at 22x were playable at my desktops.


#2

Starting with CD’s. This one was recognized as 32x max from Pioneer while it was at recognized as 48x from Samsung. As LiteOn isn’t the best for CD scanning, those are just indications only.

ΩΜΕGA Branded. Burned @32x. Scanned @24x
However Samsung seems to produce a lot lower total C1 errors.

P.S. ΩMEGA(ΩΜΕΓΑ) is the last letter in Greek Alphabet so this could be an indication of the media’s quality. :wink:






#3

Same here. As by Liteon Samsung is a lot better than Pioneer at those CD’s.
And a lot faster too. While the firmware isn’t that good.

Samsung premium.
Burned @32x as only Samsung recognizes them as 48x.
Scanned @24x.






#4

Princo branded.
Burned @32x. Scanned @24x.
Here Pioneer wins only by a small margin at the end of Sammy’s scan.

Pioneer - Samsung: 1-2.






#5

CMC printable. Pioneer sees those as 40x while Samsung steady @48x.
Both burned @40x. Scanned @24x.

Pioneer - Samsung: 1-3






#6

Ritek.
Burned @32x. Scanned @24x.
Pioneer - Samsung 2-3.






#7

sverkalo

Why don’t you use the optiarc?
It’s a better cd scanner than the liteon dvd-/+rw.


#8

But it’s not as for DVD’s. And I don’t have it on my setup. I ran only 3 DVD.


#9

Last CD. Burned @40x. Scanned @24x.
Verbatim.
Pioneer - Samsung 3-3.






#10

[B]Ritek Printable.[/B] Both drives sees them as 8x. [B]Burned @8x. Scanned @8x. [/B] Samsung never got to 8x and Pioneer was almost 2 minutes faster on this! Pioneer easily wins one of the worse (if not the worse) burn I have ever seen. Till I saw Samsung’s burn… There is always something worse as people say. I have never seen over 3 millions PI Errors and 234562 PI F.






#11

Pioneer can burn this @up to 18x while Samsung only @16x.
Both burned @16x. Scanned @8x. Samsung wins with a big margin.

P-S:0-1.






#12

Both of the above were printables.


#13

Printable Verbatims. Recognized as 20x by Pioneer and as 16x by Samsung. Both burned @16x. Till 4g Pionner’s burn was brilliant but till then only. After that mark it was a disaster.

P-S:0-2.






#14

Printable TY. Samsung max @22x. Pioneer max @20x. Both burned @20x.
At the end again Pioneer spoiled that wonderful burn. A possible new bag for Pioneers? I hope not. But let’s say that it’s a coincidence only. Samsung’s burn is a way worse in general but it retains a better score… Till now I really can’t see what people find in Pioneer. I think my LG 62N will outperform this for the fun only.
P-S:0-3.






#15

Both burned @8x. Is this a contest of ugliness or what?
P-S:1-3.






#16

Does it really? With quality / known media maybe, but with less known / crappy media, there is still a lot of room for improvement when it comes to the DVR-216. Pioneer still has a lot of work to do, and your tests just confirm that.


#17

I said that because they brought out some firmwares at least one I know of 1.06.
My drive had 1.04. While Samsung has made no new firmware.


#18

Both burned @8x. Actually Samsung burned this @4x. It seems that its firmware is more “clever” at understanding bad MID’s. Gigatain branded.
P-S:1-4.






#19

Philips branded. Both burned @16x.
I think we have a new high score…
By Samsung this time.

P-S:2-4.






#20

Both burned @18x. In reality only Samsung burned that @18x but Pioneer was somehow faster even on 16x. :confused: Burn Out branded.

P-S:3-4. Pioneer strikes back.

P.S. Manufacturers optimizing their drives for faster speeds resulting some times in bad lower burns. But will see that later on, on some TY @4x.