What's the latest LG DVD model please?




Sorry for such a lame question, but I’ve yet to find a decent way of identifying latest model out for any of the DVD writers. Manufacturers own website are often of no help at all, so often end up having to search Amazon’s ‘Date First Available’ as a guide. This is ok as long as I manage to find all the drives which is not always the case and I end up with old model, as I did recently by purchasing Samsung 224DB over the 224FB (doh!).

Is there a better way to find out for myself latest model numbers? If not can you throw me a bone and provide latest model number for LG DVD writer please?

Thank you



I ended up going for the LG GH24NSC0.AUAA15B which was the latest model I could find. If anyone knows of a site or thread that simply lists latest models, that would be great for future purchases please?

Thank you


LG table is coming soon, please be patient :slight_smile: It will list all known LG DVD and BD models and also some OEM-exclusive models (like GH60N or GH80N), info about their hardware and clones.

Yes, GH24NSC0 is the latest model at the moment.


Thank you, but this is the thing, I didn’t know such thing as ‘tables’ existed (or soon to be). Is there such a thing for other brands such as Samsung, Lite-on etc please, and if so where can I find?

Good news I have in at least ordered the latest, but do you or any one else know what the end of the model number relates to? For example most stores are selling, .AUAA10B, but one store I found selling .AUAA15B, so I ordered that one.


I don’t know what information is encoded in these letters and numbers combinations :frowning:

So far I’ve made three tables:

LG table is next…


Oh wow! Great work, thank you!

Just had a quick glance at the liteon table, but how are they ordered exactly, or in other words how do I identify which is the latest model please?

As I’m not too familiar with all the different model number, from a guess I recon as PATA is at the top and Blu-ray at the bottom it’s ordered from oldest to newest correct?

Fantastic table, so thanks again for your efforts. :bow:


Basically, I list drives in following order:

  1. DVD±RW in combined order - from oldest to newest + from slowest to fastest + without/with LightScribe

  2. BD-ROM in the same order

  3. BD-ROM/DVD±RW in the same order

  4. BD-RE in the same order

Some tables can also contain HD DVD drives, but that’s very, very rare case. :slight_smile:

As for latest LiteOn - search iHAS122 F, iHAS124 F or iHAS324 F - they share same hardware. Manufacture date will be December 2014 or newer.


The table is generally ordered oldest to newest, by the way. However, the Blu-ray readers (then combo drives, then writers) come after all the DVDRW drives, if I remember correctly. That’s in case you ever try to find a LiteOn iHASx24 F but can only find older hardware revisions.


Thanks guys, your help is very much appreciated. Using Lite-on table as example, do you have any idea why there have been sooo many models, many of which are practically identical? Often only difference appears to be chipset, so guess this is just money saving process or something else?

One very noticeable difference I see is the buffer sizes continuously getting smaller and smaller. Would this have any direct effect on burnt quality and therefore should we allow for extra buffering within software settings?

From your experience would you say the older drivers make better quality burns and if so is this down to the chipset, larger buffer size or something else? I’m basically trying to identify whether it’s worth pursuing new drives anymore or similar go for older used ones. So far I’ve not had any luck with new drivers. as I’ve tried iHAS124-14 & Samsung 224DB and both had to go back.

With the iHAS it would complete burn ‘successfully’, but some of those discs would appear blank! I was very surprised by this as I already have an older version (04 I think) that has been solid for the past 4 or so years.

With the Samsung this created three distinctive burn rings which appeared to happen each time the speed ramps up throughout the burn. It done this with various different media types. I’ve since discovered via another post regarding this that this is in fact quite normal for latest drivers, but really something I’d like to avoid as even if burn quality is fine, it can just look bad to the layman.

I’ve now ordered the LG GH24NSC0.AUAA10B, but if that fails then I guess I’ll have no choice but to source older used drivers, but then of course run the risk of getting drivers at the end of their life. It’s then a lottery on how much the drive has been used.

With brings me nicely on to the life of a drive. I’ve never really looked in to this properly, but does a laser/drive burn quality diminish over time through use or just naturally due to age (PC heat I guess), or can it just keep on going? I think often people just play it safe and just replace drive because they are so cheap, but with these new drivers not being up to spec (at least for me), I will now be looking to keep my older drives as long as possible, so if they do start playing up, I will be looking for causes other than the drive it’s self, ie perhaps something I’ve installed affecting burns, bad disc batch, burning settings etc.

I believe this is my oldest known profile now, and this is post number 50 :iagree: Only taken me 10 years. Will I make it to 100 posts be 2025… we shall see!


Newer hardware revisions with similar specs are merely to reduce cost. LiteOn does it, Samsung does it (AB is old, FB is new with small buffer), LG does it (90 is older than C0, C0 has small buffer). Except for the part where Samsung sometimes has firmware issues, and LG reduced the number of available write speeds, quality shouldn’t be majorly different. (But to that end, slightly older drives would probably be a tiny bit better, if only because of mature firmware).

Buffer size: whatever software buffer size you were using on a drive with a 2 MB hardware buffer, should work for a drive with a 512 KB buffer (data is flowing too quickly for a minor 1.5 MB difference to matter).

For LiteOn’s iHASxyy z nomenclature (example: iHAS120 6), the z tells you what hardware revision you had. (z is a number or letter from 6 to 9, then from A to F, with a few extra hardware versions Y, X, and W that fall out of step. 6 is oldest, F is newest). When you say you had an older model “04”, that doesn’t indicate which hardware revision worked for you (those extra two or three digits only indicate how the drive was bundled/packaged, and/or for what market it was packaged). :wink:

Drives aren’t the same thing as drivers; be mindful of that if you ever need to troubleshoot things.

Drives have been making rings on discs ever since 4x and 8x drives came about, as a result of them using Z-CLV to step the speed up progressively. Actually, burn rings can happen with any drive that recalibrates during burning, even using CLV (flat lines, where the data transfer speed is constant) or CAV/P-CAV (curves; the data transfer speed smoothly increases as the laser progresses toward the outer edge). So you could well run into the rings with older good drives as well as this LG you’ll receive. It may not look appealing, but it’s the nature of the burn process.

Lasers decay due to use. Like most electronics, excessive heat will shorten the expected life of a given part, but it can also be affected by the initial quality of the part. …And, much like other mechanical and electronic devices, they may well age even when not in use, though that’s not typically a major problem unless it’s something that involves potentially reactive chemicals (such as some types of capacitors & batteries).

Older drives sometimes produce better burns. But, as exemplified by your iHAS124…A? Y? B? C?, having an older device doesn’t guarantee fewer issues.


Thanks Albert and sorry I was working from memory, but of course I should have learnt not to because my memory is poor. Then again perhaps I did learn but forgot again due to poor memory. What was I saying again? :bigsmile: Ok so to confirm then, my old trusty iHAS model is in fact iHAS 124-19 B (not 04). Because this drive have been so solid for me, I opted for latest iHAS, but that resulted in burn rings, which I thought meant it was defective.

I can honestly say after using a large number of different drives over many years since early 2000’s, the iHAS124-14 EUV (I guess this is model ‘E’?) is the first drive where I’ve experienced burn rings after successfully burns. Any idea why some produce these rings where as others don’t, and is there anyway to identify this before purchase, certain chipsets or something, or is it just a case of trial and error? Is it possible a firmware change can avoid such burn rings, or is it just the nature of that particular drive that will remain constant? If a drive does produce such rings, is it normal for it to happen consistently, because I burned around 30 discs with the iHAS124-14 EUV before running disc quality check (stupid I know!) and all had significant burn rings. I will simply look to avoid such drives for now, but there could come a time where it will be impossible to avoid, so good idea to learn now about them now.

I just received LG GH24NSC0, only done one burn so far, but looks good. No awful burn marks, quick under 9 mins for full disc at 8x and nero speed disc quality test of 95… but there is still a problem! I use Roxio Creator Classic (RCC) to burn to three different drives simultaneously. I know ideally I should be burning to same model drives, but surprisingly current setup works well, or did until now. My third drive become faulty which is the very reason why I’m now on this quest to find a half decent new replacement.

So, issue I have now is RCC reports that this new LG has ‘different’ write speed of "8x MAX (10.8MB/Sec) compared to my other two drives which has write speed of “8x (10.8MB/Sec)”. RCC requires that all drives has same write speed in order to be able to write to them all simultaneously. Of course as you can see the actual write speed is exactly the same, but the way they are presented to RCC is different…

8x [B]MAX[/B] (10.8MB/Sec)


8x (10.8MB/Sec)

RCC sees this as a difference and therefore reports ‘No common speeds available’. As a result I cannot write to all three drives simultaneously as I could previously.

Is this an actual difference at drive level, or is this RCC software issue? If it’s a drive issue, is it possible F/W change could resolve this? If it is a software issue, do you know of any other reliable burners that’s capable of running one instance, and burning to multiple different burners simultaneously please?

I could of course just purchase another two LG GH24NSC0 drives and be done with it, but it would be good to understand the reason for this discrepancy as this is not the first time I’ve come across this issue.

Thank you


For the media you’re using, what is the max write speed shown when you use a utility such as Nero CD-DVD Speed? http://www.cdrlabs.com/View-details/Misc/31-Nero-CD-DVD-Speed-

(Once the disc is in the drive, click the Disc Info tab. If you like, you can take a screenshot of the window and add it as an attachment. Do this for all the drives you’re trying to use, if you please.)

I’m not sure if Nero’s suite supports writing to multiple drives from one instance, and I don’t know of any other software that would offer the same flexibility. Most folks just tax their system with multiple instances of an app.

Side note: burn rings happen with all chipsets. It is a possibility with almost all drives. It depends on many things, including how the drive is told to handle itself, and isn’t something that can be tweaked/changed/avoided in situations when it happens (other than maybe changing the speed to 6x or 4x to reduce the chance of a recalibration during burn. But I don’t think the LG you’ve gotten supports either speed).


Sorry, I should clarify, max speed and media is not the issue, 16x is available but I’m simply selecting to burn at 8x.

When burning simultaneously all drives must have same speed available and of course they can all burn at 8x individually, but the issue is that Roxio Creator Classic reports speeds slightly different for LG GH24NSC0 as explained above. As a result I’m unable to burn three drives simultaneously as two drives report “8x (10.8MB/Sec)” where as the LG reports “8x [B]MAX[/B] (10.8MB/Sec)”, with of course MAX being the only difference, but software appears to think this IS a speed difference.

I guess it’s a software issue then if you’ve never experienced this before, but I’ve seen it with a few other drives. While there is no actual different in speed (both can burn at 8x), some drives appear to report this speed differently to the software, resulting in the software thinking that speeds don’t match across drives, which of course they actually do in reality.

I’ve read that running multiple instances of a burning program can lead to it’s own problems due to reading from the same file, so perhaps then have to use a separate ISO for each instance, all of which gets a bit messy and long winded, however, have you any recommendations of program to try this with please?

This is why I like Roxio Creator Classic as it can burn to as many drives as you need from the one instance, and burns are good, but of course just discovering this small issue now. I’m sure there was another program like it very many years ago (perhaps early Nero?), but as of today the only program I know that offers simultaneous burns is Roxio, pre ‘NXT’ as they removed Creator Classics from latest packages.


ImgBurn supports multiple instances. I suggest you test it out (just try to do a simulation to DVD-R, if you have any at hand; else, try to use the Build function to create 2 or 3 ISO files from files on your hard drive, to ensure few to no buffer underruns will occur).

Should you decide to try ImgBurn, be aware of the installation process; some value-add software may try its hardest to be added, and it’s annoying to get rid of once installed. Nothing malicious, though.

I’ve no idea why the drive reports its speeds the way it does (LG always does things a little bit differently…), but I can see where the problem would come in. Assuming drives would overall use the same write curve (same speed at the same point on a disc), you could sync them all up after a successful lead-in and the worst problem you could have would be a buffer underrun. Except for if a drive was to slow itself down, which would cause a similar issue…but I guess Roxio didn’t implement an override, and in that last case, the software would keep pausing the faster writers until the slower writer was all caught up (which is undesirable). :doh:


Most drives report same speed, even my LG BH10LS30 which I use in simultaneous burns, so doesn’t appear to be brand specific, just model specific. I’ve so far experienced this problem with the LG GH24NSC0 as mentioned, and also Pioneer DVR-A18LBK. All other drives has reported same speed and therefore been able to burn to all simultaneously.

I don’t know how exactly Roxio does it, but it works very well with very little coasters burning to four drives simultaneously. I’ve watched the burn process and the ‘percentage complete’ varies slightly from drive to drive throughout. Also they do not all finish at the same time (only minor differences), so software doesn’t appear to pause faster writers. Just this one little niggle as described which stops it from being perfect, but this could be easily resolved by purchasing identical models which is probably recommended anyways. However considering ALL my drives are different brands and models, I’m very impressed how well it works and that it works at all, as didn’t think such a thing was possible due to the types of problems you’ve pointed out.

Well I’ve given up on new drives for now. The LG GH24NSC0 is actual fine, but as above, if I want to burn to four drive simultaneously, I’d need to purchase another three of those due to different way speed is reported, and can’t justify replacing decent drives I already have. As such I dived in to my PC graveyard today and pulled out some golden (cough beige) oldies! Found I had a BRAND NEW Pioneer 215D and also pillaged a Pioneer 112D from old PC. Installed and as expected, working with no issues. No horrid burn rings, no speed issues, just decent no hassle burns. Ah the good old days & hardware! Don’t make them like they used to. :bigsmile:

My SilverStone Fortress FT02 has taken a hit in the looks department as now looks like a bit of a pig, what with it’s new ‘golden’ highlights, but I’ll take function over appearance any day! :iagree: