Reasons to get Benq1620 over NEC3520?

vbimport
#1

This will be my first DVD burner. Doing research on this site has helped me alot. I’ve narrowed my choice to the BenQ 1620 and the NEC 3250. Can someone tell me why one would be better than the other? I know the NEC can be flashed with a modified firmware to remove riplock as well as add additional settings such as bitsetting.

The BenQ would be a no-brainer however but the reason I even ask is because I noticed the CD-R write speed on the NEC is 48x and the BenQ is 40x. Is the difference negligable? I’m replacing a very slow 12x Liteon CD-R drive so I’d like this new drive to have the fastest CD writing speeds as possible. Also the NEC seems to be a more established brand? I don’t remember BenQ cd-writers to be terrible good in terms of quality.

Thanks :slight_smile:

#2

I own both the BenQ 1620A with B7U9 firmware (tried them all) and the NEC 3520 with L&D 1U8 Mod firmware (tried 1U6 and 1U7 along with stock) and the 1620 has always made better burns than the 3520. I have tried every IDE setting (slave, master fresh XP install) and have 10 different media from cheap Legacy to TY media and the BenQ has burned them all better. Still hoping the NEC gets better but don’t know.

#3

BENQ has official firmware upgrades quite frequently compared to NEC which doesn’t have many official firmware upgrades. But there are hacked firmwares that are available to use with many of the NEC drives.

My BENQ 1620’s burn flawlessly with firmware B7P9. :wink:

#4

to me cdr burning anything above 24x is fine with me…heck i am still using my 24x teac cdr to burn cds…

#5

Ok what about this noted quality issues with the BenQ? I don’t mean on just this forum but a few of the other forum boards I frequent, there are some who note a quality problem with the 1620’s… Is it just a rumor that’s gotten out of hand?

p.s. eleewhm, very random question but you arent a whitemage in Final Fantasy XI are you?

also why would you use your 24x teac if you have a benq that can do 40x to write cd-rs? Am I better off getting a seperate CD burner for CD-R’s instead of letting the DVD-R do the job for me?

#6

dun understand your random question here…too deep for my simple mind… :slight_smile: whats a whitemage???

well me…i do this

rip DVDs -->> my LiteOn DVD-ROM
burn/read DVDs -->> My benqs…
read CD -->> my cheap sony CD-ROM
burn CD -->> my teac CD-RW 24x

i prefer to have a specific drive for each job…

thats the reason for this … lol

#7

I agree with this assessment. Most of the cheap bulk CD discs that I use tend to burn notably cleaner at either 24X or 32X (as shown by CDSpeed). The time difference is only about 60 seconds or so.

The BenQ will likely burn your DVD discs a bit cleaner and faster than the NEC 3520 - especially when used with +R media. I have both BenQ 1620 and a NEC 3500, and the BenQ burn generally produces a cleaner CDSpeed scan - particularly when the burn is made at a speed faster than 8X. And most 8X +R media overspeeds perfectly to 12X when it’s burned on the 1620.

The BenQ also offers you CDSpeed quality scanning while the NEC currently does not (although apparently this is now on the immediate horizon for NEC drives too).

Finally, with ala42’s new read patched firmware installed, you’ll be able to rip any pressed double-layer movie to your hard drive with DVD Decrypter in under 10:00, making the BenQ 1620 the fastest reader available!

#8

I vote for Benq also. When I bought this drive a couple of months ago, the reports of QC problems were surfacing (maybe sooner) and I got nervous considering my drive was made in Malaysia 10/04. I couldn’t return my drive so what did I do? I bought another one (retail for both) just in case. Then I saw the LG 4163 and fell for it also. Saw a good price on the NEC 3520 and got one of those also.

I fully expected to run into problems (maybe I still will), but haven’t had any problems yet. I flashed the drive to P9 and it’s working flawlessly. It burns + and - equally well, unlike some reports I’ve read. I’m running as the master along with a Pioneer as a slave and I think the Pioneer is dying of boredom. I have not used the Pioneer at all in 2 months! In fact, I haven’t even touched the other Benq, LG 4163 or the NEC! I love this Benq :bow:
I’m Asian and I’m tempted to create an alter in front of my Benq so that I really can bow to this and pay homage :bow: :smiley:

#9

Well who wouldn’t vote for BenQ on a BenQ forum? =)) Buy a NEC :stuck_out_tongue: :stuck_out_tongue:

#10

QUALITY CONTROL happens with all brands of DVD BURNERS, BENQ is not the only one. Just take a look at the PLEXTOR, BTC, PIONEER & NEC forums they all have their own pros and cons. Do yourself a favor and just order the BENQ 1620 and if you’re not satisfied with the drive I am sure someone on this forum site would want it. :wink:

#11

Hey Quikee2,

The subject line says it all! :bigsmile: He didn’t ask for any reasons to get the NEC3520 over the 1620!

That said, a major reason to go with the NEC is the customized firmware enhancements. Just about every piece of media ever made has had its write strategies tweaked, with cheap 4X media often overspeeded to 8X -and even 12X for some of it.

Also, I believe that the NEC works a bit better with -R media than the BenQ.

#12

I don’t think it matters what forum your in if you own both.
The NEC 3520 doesn’t burn as good as the 1620 for me. The NEC 3500 seems to burn some media better than the 3520 from the posts I see in the NEC forum that I read every Day. One thing that I noticed is the majority of NEC posts don’t show media scans. I know the NEC doesn’t do them but people in that forum say its a good scan if CD speed reads without a dip. My media scans show major quality differences with the BenQ with the same media from the same spindle and several different discs with the same data.

Scans below are typical although the jitter spike on the NEC is higher than normal. Media isn’t great but even TY or MCC media burns the same general way.

Top scan is BenQ burned CMC E01@8X
Bottom is NEC CMC E01@8X
same files on both.



#13

Benq 1620 is a faster reader and a faster writer than Nec. Benq doesn’t need tweaked firmwares to overspeed when burning. The quality of the burns is superior. Benq can also do quality scans which is a really nice feature.

Like someone already said, probably NEC deals better with the -R and -RW so if you prefer this format you should go for a NEC.

#14

To be honest its a very hard call. If I could only have one I would take the BenQ. :slight_smile:

#15

Agree.

#16

:bigsmile:

#17

I have an NEC ND-3500A and a BenQ DW1620Pro… I prefer the BenQ over the NEC, but alas, I do prefer my Plextor PX-716A over the BenQ… But this is a marginal preference. The BenQ is a fine drive and I recommend it to everyone because of the “bang for the buck”!

#18

i also was choosing between these 2 and went with the benQ.

works great!!

#19

hmmm I haven’t seen the BenQ bashers around lately.

#20

I took the Benq because there were no patches available :slight_smile: