Worth Using K-Probe Over CD-Speed Anymore?

vbimport

#1

Is it worth still using K-Probe anymore ?? as cd speed keeps getting updated and for some reason k-probe gives errors(errors showing up as little green bars) when reading xbox backups where as cd speed does’nt. I done a test of a 360 backup today, k-probe gave errors but cd speed said no glitch’s removed. K-probe does how ever seem to give lower avg. 's than cd speed.


#2

I kinda like using both…having said that, I have a shortcut to CD-DVD Speed on the desktop, but not KProbe. KProbe is installed though.

Never noticed anything odd error-wise, though. I’ve never burned or tested an XBox backup though.


#3

That’s normal. If I remember correctly there was a discussion about that some time ago, with different ways of calculation and somebody mentioning that the PIE average is so low compared to the graph, and another user saying that the PIE average would have to change with the window size if it should be accurate or something like that. :confused:
Too lazy for the search right now.


#4

I use KProbe primarily. The main reason is that you can save the raw data in a text file and do your own analysis of the results. In fact, I’ve spent a lot of time in the past year working on a display tool that shows the KProbe and DVDScan results in one plot.

CD-Speed has an intermediate sampling step for the display results. The maximum count for a sample in a “display bin” (which seems to be ca. 1 MiB) is saved and shown in the plot. Erik mentioned here that the average values shown are based on this intermediate sampling. Hence the CD-Speed averages will be higher than what KProbe shows.

KProbe also has an averaging problem- the PIF averages are too high because the totals are divided by the number of PI samples (which are summed over [B]8[/B] ECC blocks). This has the absurd effect that (for a bad disc) the average PIF count can be higher than the max. value.

G