SH-S202N vs SH-S203N

vbimport

#1

I’m on the brink of buying a new burner and like what I’ve read about the SH-S203N. Only problem is that it’s a SATA drive and I don’t have a SATA controller. I will have an open IDE port which brings me to the S202N which has identical specifications other than the interface. The price (on NewEgg) is EXACTLY the same at the moment, too. Other than the connectivity, is there anything different about the S202N? Can I reasonably expect similar performance from either of these drives? I can buy an add-on controller, but unless it gives me some advantage with this burner, I don’t have any other reason to do so.

I’m waiting to see tomorrow’s ads for Best Buy and Circuit City before buying an OEM version of one of these from NewEgg.

Thanks.

Ray


#2

It’s known from people posting scans here that the PATA versions are inferior for whatever reason. Firmware possibly? Not sure. I’d go with the SATA version.

You can buy an PCI/SATA card. Silicon Image based cards seem to be best.


#3

Thanks, Bob.

This is getting a little off topic, but it’s still related. A SATA controller opens a whole new can o’ worms. Most seem to be designed for RAID and from what I’ve read, require RAID drivers to be installed, etc., etc. :confused: I just want to change out a DVD burner.

Happen to know of any that are simply a SiI3512-based controller that doesn’t assume RAID?

Ray


#4

No sorry my mobo has 6 SATA connections on it. I don’t have an IDE/SATA card. But yes you are correct on the non raid card or firmware to use on a card such as this.

I know when the 202’s came out…some members here sold them and got the 203’s.

You can always try a 202 and see how it performs for you.

Edit:
Sorry this is way off topic…but you could try a Pioneer 115. It’s an IDE (PATA) drive and performs as well as the Pioneer 215 SATA drive.


#5

Just an FYI. My Sony DRU-840A, which appears to be a Samsung SH-S202N performs better than my Pioneer 115D but I do agree that some of the earlier S202N drives didn’t perform very well, and Samsung doesn’t support the firmware well (no updates since Oct 2007).


#6

I want to try the Samsung because of what I’ve read about it burning some DL media I want to use. I found another thread where zebadee mentions flashing the SiL3512 BIOS to a base version without RAID. If I can sort out what I need for that, I can buy a generic SATA controller for $30 or less.

Ray


#7

[quote=NOTS3W;2059823]I want to try the Samsung because of what I’ve read about it [B][U]burning some DL media[/U][/B] I want to use. I found another thread where zebadee mentions flashing the SiL3512 BIOS to a base version without RAID. If I can sort out what I need for that, I can buy a generic SATA controller for $30 or less.

Ray[/quote]

Hi :slight_smile:
Knowing what I know.
I would suggest the Pioneer DVR-115(D) a better bet.
If you still want SATA then Pioneer DVR-215(D).


#8

:eek: At $30 each, I can buy both. Pioneer 215D and Samsung S203N with a Syba 2-port SATA controller from NewEgg. Still less than the cost of one drive and controller at local retail. Gotta keep the economy stimulated, right? Only problem I see is that neither reports jitter and I have only two 5.25" bays. I was going to keep the BenQ DW1655 connected for scanning but short of an external case, that won’t be possible.


#9

If you can find it somewhere, get a Samsung SH-S182D. It’s an excellent PATA drive, the only problem is the DVD-R lead in issue (although i have not experienced any problems with that)


#10

[QUOTE=molnart;2059939]If you can find it somewhere, get a Samsung SH-S182D. It’s an excellent PATA drive, the only problem is the DVD-R lead in issue (although i have not experienced any problems with that)[/QUOTE]

The lead-in issue is fixable by cross-flashing the S182 into an OEM H652.


#11

[QUOTE=C0deKing;2059645]…Samsung doesn’t support the firmware well (no updates since Oct 2007).[/QUOTE]

Although they did just release new firmware for the 202 series.


#12

I’m frustrated! I now own both a Samsung SH-S208N and a Pioneer DVR-215D. Both are SATA and all works well. I moved my old IDE BenQ DW1655 to an external USB enclosure for scanning only. Everything has the latest official firmware.

I know I’m not using optimum media (Moser Baer 8x +R DL RICOHJPN-D01-67) but I expected to get at least [I]acceptable[/I] results with one or both of these new drives. Instead, I’m getting garbage regardless of burn speed. I thought that it might be my BenQ scanner but I get similar results scanning the discs with the Samsung and they can’t both be bad. I’ve attached scans of what is happening with these discs in case anyone has any suggestions.

The reason I’m using these discs is that the print side is outstanding (Aquashield glossy injet hub printable) and I’m not interested in labeling my discs with a Sharpie. My alternatives are to shrink everything to fit on single layer discs and use Taiyo Yuden -R printables or find some glossy polyester labels and put them on Verbatims. The last two pics are of a Taiyo Yuden TYG03 burned at 8x. Is that TRT result good?

Ray






#13

yeah D01’s are not the greatest. What speed did you burn them at? Try 4x.

TYG03’s i would say burn them at 12x or 16x. But at 8x it looks ok. That TRT looks like that because of the external enclosure chipset. Looks like it’s only good to read and burn at 12x.

Try a TRT with you Sammy or your Pioneer.


#14

Thanks, Bob. The first scan above was burned at 4x on the Pioneer. The next one was at 4x on the Samsung.

The TYG03 was burned at 8x on the Samsung.

Are you saying that the external enclosure could be messing with my scans? That’s interesting and something I was wondering about. Attached here are three scans of the same disc. The first was from two weeks ago when the BenQ was inside the computer. I was pretty excited about that one. The next is from today with the BenQ in the external enclosure. The disc (an Optical Quantum TTH02) was burned at 16x. It’s not horrible, but I’m clearly getting more errors and failures with the scanner in the external enclosure. The third one is of the same disc scanned a few minutes ago at 12x. Certainly different, but I’m not sure it’s better.

Are you suggesting that I might get better scan results with the BenQ internal? I can swap out one of the new SATA drives and try that if it’s a possibility.

I’ll do a TRT scan on the Samsung and report back.

Thanks.

Ray





#15

Here are the TRT scans from the Samsung and the Pioneer. Much better, but what does it mean?




#16

[QUOTE=NOTS3W;2065203]Thanks, Bob. The first scan above was burned at 4x on the Pioneer. The next one was at 4x on the Samsung.

The TYG03 was burned at 8x on the Samsung.

Are you saying that the external enclosure could be messing with my scans? That’s interesting and something I was wondering about. Attached here are three scans of the same disc. The first was from two weeks ago when the BenQ was inside the computer. I was pretty excited about that one. The next is from today with the BenQ in the external enclosure. The disc (an Optical Quantum TTH02) was burned at 16x. It’s not horrible, but I’m clearly getting more errors and failures with the scanner in the external enclosure. The third one is of the same disc scanned a few minutes ago at 12x. Certainly different, but I’m not sure it’s better.

Are you suggesting that I might get better scan results with the BenQ internal? I can swap out one of the new SATA drives and try that if it’s a possibility.

I’ll do a TRT scan on the Samsung and report back.

Thanks.

Ray[/QUOTE]No scan at 8x with your BenQ. I’m just saying with your BenQ in that enclosure that i don’t think it will read or burn good above 12x.

Do your TRT’s with your Sammy or you Pioneer.

yeah you must have a crappy batch of D01’s? I have never tried them before so i really don’t know. You will have to experiment with them as far as burn speeds.


#17

[QUOTE=NOTS3W;2065223]Here are the TRT scans from the Samsung and the Pioneer. Much better, but what does it mean?[/QUOTE]That means that disc will read back fine when needed to.

Your other TRT with the BenQ crapped out at 13x and that’s why i said about it not being good above 12x for reading and burning.


#18

[quote=Bob;2065231]Your other TRT with the BenQ crapped out at 13x and that’s why i said about it not being good above 12x for reading and burning.[/quote]I second that :iagree:


#19

Gotcha! That makes the logistics of where to put the three drives easier. I’ll do quality scans at 8x on the external BenQ and TRT scans on the internal burners.


#20

Now you got it.