SOHW-1673S vs. SOHW-1693S vs.... BenQ?

vbimport

#1

I searched around a bit but did not find much information on this.
I have used LiteOn burners for many years, always in a CD-R -burning capacity. I wanted to buy a new LiteOn DVD burner last night that I could also use to burn CD-Rs. However, reading the review here about the SOHW-1673S 's very poor CD-R burning quality, I was dissuaded. I proceeded to read as many other drive reviews on here as I could handle, and wasn’t able to find any drive that could burn both CD-Rs and DVD-Rs at high speed with very low errors.

Does anyone know if the SOHW-1693S has fixed the poor CD-R burning quality?

I’ve seen a lot of people touting the BenQ drives as excellent – is there one with both high speed/low error CD-R and DVD-R burning?

I’m not so much interested in DVD+R, or any RW format.

Is a drive that does both, well, a pipe-dream? Am I going to be stuck keeping a CD-R drive for all my CD-R burns?

Thanks for any help!!!

-jeff


#2

CD burning seems to be fine at 40x. At 48x, some strange things happen.

(out of curiosity, why do you prefer DVD-R over DVD+R? DVD+R is more compatible and much more technically robust)

BenQ can’t do CD protections. But if you want to burn a DVD fast, I guess BenQ with its official overspeeding support and PCAV/CAV is probably the fastest overall.


#3

Well, as for speed, I burn on average 150 CD-Rs a month (always Taiyo-Yuden blanks), so 48X is nice.

With my DVD players I’ve always had better luck playing DVD-Rs, not DVD+Rs, and never even bothered to try +/-RWs. Is this just my odd luck or are you referring to compatability in other PC drives?

Thanks for the quick response, though.


#4

im sorry, so are you saying that even on the new SOHW-1693S that CD-R burning is only reliable at 40X? or was that in reference to the 73?

thanks :slight_smile:


#5

I tried it on the 73S. Haven’t tried CD burning on the 93S (CDs? what are those? :p), but the 73S and 93S drives and firmwares are very similar so any problem in the 73S will likely be in the 93S as well.


#6

And it really doesn’t matter much if you write it at 48x or 40x - it’s still pretty damn fast compared to dvd-writing.

And 1693 seems to be making perfect burns for me (I use only TY DVD+R).


#7

@ bigillz
Food for thought. Here’s some scans for your digestion.
1st is Verbatim CDR burned @ 4x on old CDR burner (max speed 4x).
2nd is Taiyo Yuden CDR burned @ 8x on 1653s
3rd is Verbatim CDR burned @ 40x on 1673s/JS07 :smiley:
note that TY burn is quite a bit smaller than the others.





#8

The above scans were of music CDR’s so scanned at 4x only. For those who may wish to know about reading burnt data on CDR @ max speed, I have attached same burn (1673s/JS07 @ 40x) scanned at max speed.



#9

What do you mean by that? DVD 8x is much faster than 52x CD.

50x CD = 7.5MB/s
16x DVD = about 23MB/s
8x Blu-ray = 36MB/s
USB 2.0 = 60MB/s
S-ATA III = 600MB/s


#10

700 mb … burned at 40x or 48 … its about caple seconds difrence … about 3 min+
4.5 GB burned at DVD x8 about 8+ min


#11

@besmirch
but there’s space like 7 cds on one dvd disc.


#12

Here I’d quote the person who posted after you.


#13

yes i know but mean the time …
8 min+ = making cape of coffie ;]
3 min+ = go to kitchen for sugar (if u forgoten) :stuck_out_tongue:


#14

I have owned 2 BenQ 1620’s since they came out. At that time, Lite-on wasn’t nearly as good with DVD burning, although they did CDs very well and extraordinarily fast.

Recently, I bought a Lite-On 1653 because I needed the small size and cool temperatures.

It had retained the extremely fast cd burning, now with much better quality. Surprisingly, DVD quality was much better than the Benq. After some months, DVD quality still beats both Benq.

BenQ, 8% coasters (a DVD with one or more skips). Lite-On, a total of one coaster, ever. That was my fault for overspeeding the reads to 16x. It hates that!

I had originally increased the read speed of the Lite-On to 12x, but because it wasn’t as successful as the BenQ at reading, I decreased the Lite-On back to factory defaults for read speeds.

Due to early speed lauch, a Rip at 8x on the Lite-on takes about a minute longer than the BenQ at 16x.

Same story with burns. BenQ factory overspeeds most DVDs to about double the rated speed. However, it lauches 8x writes at about 2.6x and it doesn’t reach 8x speed until over halfway through the burn. The Lite-On burning the same disk at 4x, immediately lauches the burn right on 4x and finishes nearly as quick as the BenQ with its overspeed trick. So, on economical media, the Lite-On wins for quality with slim difference in speed.

The BenQ does have early speed launch with 12x burns, and it does overspeed most 8x media to 12x for quick 6.3 minute DVD burns with great quality. 16x burning can be prevented with MediaCodeSpeedEdit as there is a huge quality drop for only a 15 second gain in speed.

BenQ burns cds with reasonable speed, but can’t come close to touching the “Lite-On CD attack mode” for speed. Write quality is similar, but because the BenQ is slower on CDs, it makes prettier quality control scans. Yes, it does write CDs with better quality, and it takes its own sweet time doing it too.

Perhaps the biggest difference between the two would be in read quality. The BenQ can read a scratched disc of DVD or CD at maximum and overclocked speed without making an error. That is a BenQ exclusive.

The BenQ is always quiet–always.

Lite-On is quiet with factory firmware and DVDs, but it does have their “cd attack mode” sound on cds. I think it is really entertaining because it is SO loud and a lot of air blows out of every conceivable crevice. You don’t hear this noise for long because it is incredibly fast with CDs.

Lite-On is always cool running. That can be important.
BenQ is somewhat warm, so just don’t install it into the very top drive bay in your case.

Due to the newly enhanced reliability, lower price, and zero screwups, I would choose the Lite-On. There is a considerable speed difference in specs, but due to early launch, the Lite-On is actually the faster unit on 8x and slower DVDs. It is also faster on CDs.

*However; if you burn 150 CDs per month, I would recommend that you purchase a Sony high speed CD burner. The CD-only unit burns with slightly better quality, is slightly faster, and is slightly more durable. Due to the volume, multiply my description of “slightly” by 150 times.
We have one in our office (red print on front 52x/32x/52x) that has performed flawlessly for several years of rough, frequent use.
They are available in a 100ms latency ($22 Newegg) and in an 80ms latency model ($32 TigerDirect).


#15

“Perhaps the biggest difference between the two would be in read quality. The BenQ can read a scratched disc of DVD or CD at maximum and overclocked speed without making an error. That is a BenQ exclusive.”

The new 1693 is an excellent reader, to quote one forum regular ->

“…because LiteOn would probably read a dvd disc even if it was pressed on camel dung…”


#16

See my signature!!! I have both liteon and BenQ and I am shocked by what you said!!!
My liteon has become a good dvd writer since the two latest firmware (CS0M and CS0P) but there is absolutly no match with my BenQ!!
But the topic is about 1673 and 1693 Vs 1620 so I won’t talk about it here.


#17

@OhYeah, Lite-On was not able to read a disc at 12x that BenQ could read at 16x. At 8x, the lite-on succesfully read the same scratched disc. Due to starting at a faster rate of speed, the Lite-on at 8x was not a great deal slower than the BenQ at 16x.

@ bichonn
Nobody was more surprised than I was. I bought 2 BenQ last year for $90 each. At the time, BenQ was certainly the best. No doubt.
When I couldn’t fit a 1620 into my HTPC project, I substituted a $43 Lite-On just because it would fit.
The Lite-On product felt and looked so cheap in comparison, having a lightweight, bouncy tray that shuts and opens. . .zigzaz? Anyway, it shuts and opens cheaply.
Imagine my surprise when I did a quality control scan and a data integrity check. For 8x and lower, it produces great quality. 12x and higher, and the BenQ has it beat.

I didn’t advise to use either one for CD writing volume production. :wink:


#18

Anyone ever notice a speed drop on the 1693S when Decrypting SL discs?..
Cause recently I patched it for 16x reading and there is a speed drop when it reaches like 40% - 70% every so often, but when I do a Transfer Rate Test it gives me a smooth curve… any thoughts?..


#19

Try switching to 12x and see if that works better, without the speed drops.


#20

“Does anyone know if the SOHW-1693S has fixed the poor CD-R burning quality?”

The review at CDRInfo says no. They report poor CD burning ability.

http://www.cdrinfo.com/Sections/Reviews/Specific.aspx?ArticleId=14282