Suggestions and Feedback for Samsung

This sticky thread is where you can post your suggestions and feedback for Samsung - things like features you would like to see and problems you would like corrected.

CDFreaks works very closely with many of the drive manufacturers now. Reviewers feedback problems that they find during the reviews and quite often they are fixed before the review is finalized. This is just an extension of that, so that the manufacturers can see what problems users are experiencing and what features will sell more drives.

Some of the manufactures even read the forums but obviously, as we all well know, it’s a very time consuming task to read all of the threads. So the intention of this thread is to create a central point for all suggestions and feedback that the manufacturers can easily read.

This sticky thread is common to all the Optical Drive forums now and through our Review Coordinators and Reviewers I will ask if they can try to encourage the manufacturers to read these threads.

When you post in this thread, please follow the below rules. If your post fails to meet these rules it will be deleted without warning or notification!

[ol][li]No flaming, complaints and/or praises. Only serious feedback and suggestions.
[/li][li]When posting feedback and/or suggestions, be detailed. Comments like “improve the firmware” will not do.
[/li][li]No questions, use the main Samsung forum for questions.
[/li][li]Again, no flaming! If you have a problem with your Samsung drive, post in the Samsung Forum. If you have a problem with someone’s post, either report the post or contact me.[/ol]Rules may be added and/or changed later.
Thanks to G@M3FR3@K for the original format of this post.

In my experiences with my TS-H552U drive I have noted the following problems I would like to see resolved:

  • Prodisc F01 and TYG02 (real TY, Fuji branded in this case) 8x -R media have a PIE spike with POF errors at the point of the shift to 8x CLV burning; TYG02 burn quality is quite bad in general, among the worst I have found in my testing with ~10 burners
  • very high PIF rates with Optodisc R004 media
  • CMC AM3 code media is supported at 16x and burns but the resulting disc is unreadable
  • Verbatim MKM A02 media burns have an excessively high average PIF error rate (around 4); the identical media burns fine on my DVR-109 so it is not a media issue
  • Ricoh R03 16x media are only supported at 12x, and have a very high PIE rate (> 100) and high PIF error rate. Again the same media burns with reasonable PIF rates (< 15 @ 16x) on my ND-3500A 2.1A
  • DVD-R media in general has quite high PIF rates in comparison to my other burners
  • Optodisc OR8 +R 8x media burns with a high PIF rate compared to most other burners - ~10x my best results
  • Sony D11 +R 8x media show a PIE spike at the point of the CLV burning stage as well, but no POF probs; PIE’s are rather elevated compared to many other burners
  • higher jitter rates on Ritek CD-R media

I have already submitted some of these problems via Samsung’s firmware update monitoring utility feedback tool.

To demonstrate, I burned an Osidisk DVD-R 8x media which uses the TYG02 code. It is a classic example of the CAV-CLV transition point problems, albeit without a noticeable spike in errors around the transition point. The jitter becomes very unstable, and this is where the POF’s occur. It also happens to burn quite badly in terms of PIE/PIF levels too. The second attachment is the same media, same spindle burned on my LG 4163B A105.

If you are interested in Samsung’s long-term thinking and plans, click here.

My SH-W162C TS10 fails to recognize BenQ branded Sony 08D1 media. CMC AM3 media also burns with problematic error spikes and POF errors.

Strange to get these bad results as they appear ok in Jan’s review results. Maybe this problem has cropped up in the TS10 firmware, as I have not had results like this from my other 6 diagnostic discs from this spindle burned on a 4167B, DVR-109, DVD-110D, DW1620 (B7V9 nad B7W9) and TS-H552U. Interestingly my first TS-H552U burned an unreadable coaster on this media, and the second one burned with POF’s but the disc could still be analyzed.

Even worse results than US06 with this Fuji branded media using the new TS-H552U US07 firmware:

TS-H552U US07 now burns Fuji TYG02 media with higher PIE/PIF levels but no POF’s, so this is an improvement over US06. Unfortunately the same applies to Osidisk TYG02 code media, which already had terrible PIE/PIF rates and many more POF’s. POF’s are nearly eliminated, but obviously the read curve is affected. Both error rates and the read curve results @ 12x are attached. Thankfully the disk was actually readable despite the huge PIF spikes and POF errors. Note that the disk ID was somehow corrupted by the TS-H552U’s handling of it as well.

TS-H552U US07 only supports Optodisc DVD-R 16X at 8x.

I have more strange results with CMC MAG AM3 Memorex branded DVD-R 16x media. Obviously there is something up with the write strategy, as the three attached scans from a SH-W162C TS10, DVR-110D 1.37, and DW1620 B7W9 show quite different results. Scans from a DW1620 BSMB were so closely aligned to the DW1620 scan that I won’t include them.

I’ve also included read scans from two different drives, neither of which show read problems like with the Osidisk media above. The results from the BenQ drives on US07 vs US06 results show a quadrupling of the PIF rate and a massive increase of about 60x in the amount of POF errors.

Interestingly, the error scans on the Pioneer likely point to why my original TS-H552U burned an unreadable coaster of this media, as there is a major spiking of PIF’s on the outside edge of the disc. Hopefully someday Samsung will get the DVD-R burning under control on this drive.

The SH-W162C TS10 also only supports CMC AE1 at 4x. Considering the attached results of CMC AE1 at 12x on a DVR-110D, the SH-W162C should at least support this media at certified speed at this stage of firmware devlopment on this drive. This media even burns stunningly good on a Liteon 812S with an earlier generation Mediatek chipset, so there really is no good reason for this. Please ignore the “Maxell” in the upload filename as this is actually unbranded generic media.

Daxon 016S DVD-R 16x media is only supported at 8x on the TS-H552U US07.

Daxon AZ3 DVD+R 16x media claims 16x support on the SH-W162C TS10 but coasters with a “Parameter Value Invalid” error attempting to create a CD-Speed data disc.

This 16x DVD+R BenQ branded DAXON AZ3 code media could use some work on the TS-H552U US07 and is only supported at 12x.

SH-W162C TS10 only supports GSC003 8x DVD-R media at 4x.


My next test disc from this spindle had 94 total PIFs burned at 16x on my 4167B DL13. This media code could use some work.

Much better than the TS-H552U US07 but still needs some work here too with the POF’s.

It would be very nice to add Nero CD-DVD Speed scanning support.

The naming scheme for OEM models should be harmonized, to simplify firmware updates and avoiding trouble for the customer. My slim TSSTcorp TS-L632B DVD+R DL burner, bought half a year ago in a Samsung X20 laptop, is officially not existant, and I’m already worried about disc support by the firmware now, some of my Sony DVD+RW will only burn at 2.4x although they are officially supporting 4x.
More effort must be put into the development of slim burners in general. 8x DVD+RW, 6x DVD-RW and 24x CD-RW are not impossible, other manufacturers have reached those speeds too. It is ridiculous that this burner supports 5x DVD-RAM but can’t even do 8x DVD+RW.

@ kg_evilboy - scanning works fine in CD-DVD Speed, you just have to remove the blocking from CD-DVD Speed’s registry entries.

Picked up a new SH-S162L, updated to US06 and this Fuji branded Ritek F1 media has some issues in the latter part of the burn. I burned 11 other test discs with various burners (BenQ, Pioneer, LG, Plextor) and this was the worst quality…it would be very competitive if the area at the end was fixed. This drive already seems to provide more competitive quality than my previous TS-H552U and SH-W162C.

The only think I dislike with my 163 is the fact that VERIFYING (after burning) craps out; eg. with Nero; showing only errors where no errors are.