Questions about NEC3500 vs Benq1620

vbimport

#1

Hi everyone, i’ve been reading reviews on here for about 2 weeks, and have narrowed down my choices either the 3500 or the 1620. I just need a few things cleared up please:

  1. I understand the 1620 is riplocked and the 3500 can have its riplocked removed, but ive also read that the 3500 is slow to rip DL movies even with riplocked removed, which drive is faster in ripping dvd-9 movies?(i am only going to have one drive, no reader)

  2. I read on the poll that the 3500 is a picky reader when it comes to scratched discs, is this true? My main purpose for getting a burner is backing up the 200 or so movies i own, and many of them are scratched, though playable, so which drive is better suited for this purpose?

  3. Which is more compatible with “crappy” media(since its the only kind of media i can get where i am at).

I greatly appriciate any help you can give me, you’ll be making this girl very happy:) thank you very much in advance.

Dana :cool:


#2

Any reason you don’t get a liteon DVD-Rom to do your ripping?


#3

Yes, I am out of IDE channels:) Already have 3 250GB hard discs installed, only room left for 1 optical drive. Currently I have a riplocked LG dvdrom/cdrw , rips at only 1.5-2x, it drives me insane!


#4

@Dana78,
I have had both of these drives. With the current firmware available I prefer the BenQ 1620.

Your question - The 1620 will rip a pressed DL movie at 8X. The 3500 with riplock removed will rip the same movie at 7X.

On the negative side, the NEC will read a burned DVD+R or a DVD-R at 16X. The 1620 will only do 8X.


#5

Ok thanks, how about reading scratched discs? is the 1620 superior in reading?

How about cheap media too?


#6

You do know they have a PCI IDE CARD card with four more ports on them? :confused: I think I got mine for $25.


#7

I am also out of PCI slots lol


#8

This is very subjective, I feel that the 1620 handles scratched disks better, but this is my option. Testing as only done with one or two pressed movie disks…


#9

Time for a new mother board. LOL :slight_smile:


#10

Ahhh, finally got my system working properly. I put the Intel IDE Drivers back to the Microsoft ones and it seems that my avalaching towards the end of discs has corrected itself. So now I have comparitive scans. Both burned at 4x, both burned on OptodiscR004 DVD-R 4x media and both scanned at maximum in the BenQ. Winner: BenQ… although the NEC did have a better “Quality Score”. First is the BenQ burn and second is the NEC burn. I’ll have more media to test with later. :slight_smile: Add your own if you feel like it and have both drives! But make sure when you test that they are burned at the same speed, etc. Keep it a fair fight. :wink:


#11

I have both and it’s not fair to compare. You and i both have modified f/w for the NEC. Out of the box which do you think Braxas?


#12

Out of the box the BenQ probably wins. BenQ seems to beat my NEC even when comparing the stock BenQ firmware to the modified firmware but that is just what I’ve been noticing lately. And my sig needs updated, that OptodiscR004 burn was done with Liggy & Dee’s Version 2 Beta 2 firmware on the NEC side of things. :slight_smile: And just to edit - I do personally think even though the Quality Score says different that the BenQ scan looks A LOT better. I don’t necessarily follow that quality score when they are both passable discs in the scan and the pure amount of errors on the BenQ is a lot less then what they are on the NEC.


#13

lol I agree. Same results here also. Nice to have the best of both worlds. I didn’t mean to take away your thunder here. Let the battle begin !


#14

Also wanted to add - I just tested both discs in a finnicky Allegro (Zenith) ABV341 DVD/VCR combo unit. While the disc from the BenQ played through without an issue the disc from the NEC did not. The disc from the NEC got through the warning, the initial Touchstone screen and from there crashed back out to the main menu. I hit play on it again and started skipping through the movie. Out of 13 chapters that disc started skipping and stuttering in the 9th chapter. As far as playability is concerned, as well, the BenQ wins. :slight_smile:


#15

I would love to see some comparative scans done at a more acceptible scan speed and using more available media. Optodisc has not recieved much attention where I read and the last comments I heard were negative. Also, while scans I have done with both Kprobe and CDSpeed are close, generally Kprobe suggests 4X to 8X as the optimal scan rate.


#16

Here’s a sampling of 1620 (1st of pair) vs 3500 (2nd of pair) for various media I’ve been testing with. The 1620 are all made with B7P9. The 3500 are with late variants of Liggy & Dee’s V1 or V2.

SONY DVD-R 8X (SONY08D1)
FUJI DVD+R 8X (YUDEN T02)






#17

Teon DVD+R 8x (cmcmag E01)
Matrix DVD+R 4X (LONGTEN 002)






#18

Verbatim DVD+R 8X (MCC 003)
http://club.cdfreaks.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=18802
http://forum.cdfreaks.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=17293

Memorex DVD+R 8X (PRODISC R03)
http://club.cdfreaks.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=15900
http://club.cdfreaks.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=15899


#19

Willis, your BenQ TY02 scan is at 8x whereas your 3500 scan is at 4x. Also your first MCC003 link doesn’t work.


#20

Sorry, I’ll try and fix these - I got screwed up trying to post attachments that I’d already posted (or half-posted in case of the MCC). Stay tuned …