Is the SH-S203B riplocked? I read in a few places that it isn’t but my Lite-on 165H6S rips way faster…almost twice as fast. Now I’m using C0deKing’s patched firmware for fast burns & fast reads but it’s not a solution to my problem. I want to pull the 165H6S so I can turn off the IDE channels but not if I can’t get this slow mofo going. I’m building a 3rd PC tonight and I have another SH-S203B to go in that one too so I’d love to find a solution to this. Anyone know if I have something screwed up here or what the deal is? Thanks.
Yes you are correct in that the Samsung is riplocked.
I believe that COdeKing’ f/w only allows SL media to have the speed read function.
Whether this will change I don’t know.
I know with ala42’s MCSE that option is greyed. This is due in part to how the f/w is presented.
Perhaps either COdeKing or ala42 can enlighten you further.
That sucks! Now I wish I never bought two of these. Anyway can someone enlighten me as to which sata drives are either not riplocked or have firmware to remove it. I do a lot of ripping so this drive is useless to me. Thanks.
Isn’t the S203B’s dual layer read speed 12x? This isn’t a riplock. Anything above 12x is typically unreliable when it comes to reading DL media. It’s set to this speed to avoid retries that could result in the read taking longer than using 12x anyway. I’ve already tried the 20A3P above 12x and it was not very successful.
BARBARIAN-X, no stock DVD burner has a DVD Video dual layer read speed faster than this. See this review page:
Just to confirm. The Samsung SH-S203B is not riplocked.
Um Dee, the review detail informational box shows a different drive, unless it’s a “Transformer.”
I would just like to ask why my BenQ 1640/1650/1655 all rip at upto 50% quicker than Lite-On, Samsung etc.
On odd ocassions nearly 16x & a awful lot of the time over 15x. With DL pressed DVDs.
Riplock is a term to state a drives speed has been limited in some way.
Whilst extreme examples might be 3x <> 5x, more commonly 5x <> 8x. With quite a few going 6x <> 12x.
Surely all these are limited?
It’s also good to distinguish between a drive that is speed limited and a drive that simply reads relatively slowly.
My 202G is no longer locked, but it’s still a slower reader (on some discs) than other drives that have the same speed ratings.
Running a CDSpeed transfer rate test on any disc that reads slowly should show that the drive is in fact having trouble reading the disc at the higher speeds. In which case it may elect to lower the read speed for the remainder of the disc.
It’s a difference in the way that different drives approach the issue of read error correction.
First, I don’t consider a Trt test with CD/DVD Speed as a “riptest”, second ripping SL movies with S203B can’t be any different from a SL Trt.
Try a [B]CSS/CPPM DL movie[/B] and compare with other burners. My tests a while ago.
Well put pinto2.
More or less what I was trying to say in my middle age senile manner. :Z
Reading and ripping are 2 different. Ripping is processor/RAM dependent…?
In general talking you are right, but nowdays compus are quite efficient when it comes to de-/encoding.
While performing tests posted I tripple tasked with my C2D box (run Shrink, browsed with Firefox and worked with M$ Paint).
That’s basically the same results I’m getting. If ripping is processor/RAM dependent I should be knocking it out of the park. I have 2 PC’s that are C2D running @ 3400Mhz & 3600Mhz, both with 2gigs of ram running @ 1066Mhz. I have tried without my overclocks and that is not the problem. Either way my 165H6S will rip SL or DL media approx twice as fast as the S203B. At this point all I want to know is which sata drive will give me similar speeds as the 165H6S so I can resolve this problem. Thanks.
Ok DL encrypted pressed DVD-Video
Quad core didn’t even break into a sweat. (screenshot taken near the layerbreak)
Do you have any other SATA drive that can make your quad chip sweat?
A comparision would be nice…
BTW, I’ve a feeling that maybe we can’t compare SATA burners with IDE ones when it comes to de-/encoding and “riplock”.
I have a Lite-On 20A1S.
I’ll take it for a spin in a minute.
For comparison. (Lite-On LH-20A1S stock firmware).
BTW: Motherboard is an Asus P5K (SATA controller onboard ICH9).
OS: Windows Vista Home Premium. (64bit)
So what is the status of this…I am confused?
It appears to me Dee is using Vista and DVD shrink…
It appears Pinto is using XP and DVD Decryptor…
(I could be wrong on both of the above)
The only apples to apples is Pinto’s link:
The BenQ spanks the 203b with that OS/software combo.
Barbarian-s thinks it is riplocked
Zebadee- thinks it is riplocked
Pinto- thinks it is riplocked
COdeking -thinks DL is 12x set
Dee - thinks it is not riplocked
(sorry if I have a misunderstanding of any of the above posters views,that is just what I think you guys are saying…like I said I am confused on the status here)…correct me where I am wrong.
- Is it riplocked or not?
- Why is the BenQ (old tech) so much faster in Pinto’s link?
I think Dee ruled out processor/memory. Since most who posted here on this thread (not including me) are pretty much experts, what do you guys/gals think is the reason the BenQ is so much faster???
PS Oh yea…if the problem is the drive, will Alan or COdeking (or both) be willing to work on this…Please…I hope???
There are other factors too.
Perhaps pinto’s DVD has other protections that slows down the Samsung when ripping actual data from the disc.