 |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
goodnet
•Damn• I look good.
Registered: Nov 2000
Location: Toronto, Canada
|
|
|
Pioneer DVR-107D (oem). I highly reccomend the Pioneer brand as this example has worked well for me, even with dirt cheap media.
Having DVD Dual layer functionality is nice for the future - but dual layer burning is not yet feasible; there is a lack of supply in DL media & the ones you can find now are still expensive. Wait at least a year or so until dual layer becomes mainstream. Stick with single layer discs b/c of thier relative maturity & affordability.
As for your concern of the buffers - if you have a computer with decent specs, I doubt you'll have much of a problem with buffer underruns. A 2 MB buffer will work excellent with any of the Pentium 4 (or equivalent AMD) with at least 512 MB of RAM, and taking the data off a separate HD (not your system HD).
I have an AMD Athlon 750 Mhz PC w/384 MB of ram & burn off a 2nd IDE HD. Unless I have tons of background processes running, I rarely have a problem burning at 8x - and the buffer underrun protection always saves the day if I do get underruns.
|
|
Dec-09-2004 21:34
|
|
|
 |
 |
Orko
Digital Hippie

Registered: Nov 2002
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
|
|
|
| quote: | Originally posted by goodnet
Pioneer DVR-107D (oem). I highly reccomend the Pioneer brand as this example has worked well for me, even with dirt cheap media.
Having DVD Dual layer functionality is nice for the future - but dual layer burning is not yet feasible; there is a lack of supply in DL media & the ones you can find now are still expensive. Wait at least a year or so until dual layer becomes mainstream. Stick with single layer discs b/c of thier relative maturity & affordability.
As for your concern of the buffers - if you have a computer with decent specs, I doubt you'll have much of a problem with buffer underruns. A 2 MB buffer will work excellent with any of the Pentium 4 (or equivalent AMD) with at least 512 MB of RAM, and taking the data off a separate HD (not your system HD).
I have an AMD Athlon 750 Mhz PC w/384 MB of ram & burn off a 2nd IDE HD. Unless I have tons of background processes running, I rarely have a problem burning at 8x - and the buffer underrun protection always saves the day if I do get underruns. |
word! i have the Pioneer DVR-108. Its awsome.
4x DL, 16x single layered. and i gots no coasters yet! ive burned about 150dvds already. I definatly am happy with my burner.
The only complaint about this burner that some people have is the slower rippping speed, but thats due to a built in limit. You can just upgrade the firmware, and boom, fast ripping.
And the best part about this burner? it will not let you burn faster than the disc is capable of handling, so no wasted discs. BUt you can burn at 12x on some 8x media, because the disc can handle it, just not advertised. I do it all the time.
|
|
Dec-09-2004 21:45
|
|
|
 |
 |
smuncky
Architect

Registered: Dec 2003
Location: richmond hill, ontario, canada
|
|
|
Dec-09-2004 23:18
|
|
|
 |
 |
goodnet
•Damn• I look good.
Registered: Nov 2000
Location: Toronto, Canada
|
|
|
I'd stay away from BenQ. Through reviews and my own experiences with an Acer product (Benq = Acer's peripheral line now) they pale in comparison to the quality of other manufacturers. Those reviews on videohelp.com don't look promising either (seems to prefer +R discs).
The NEC is almost the same price and I've heard much better things about it in general.
|
|
Dec-10-2004 00:03
|
|
|
 |
 |
Funkyfun
Supreme tranceaddict
Registered: May 2004
Location: Toronto
|
|
|
| quote: | Originally posted by goodnet
Having DVD Dual layer functionality is nice for the future - but dual layer burning is not yet feasible; there is a lack of supply in DL media & the ones you can find now are still expensive. Wait at least a year or so until dual layer becomes mainstream. Stick with single layer discs b/c of thier relative maturity & affordability.
|
Rite on...i thought the same about DL after doing some reading on it...its a good new technological enhancement and will eventually become cost and media effective at some point... but for now it takes painfully long to burn 8 gigs (45 mins @2.x) plus the media costs a fortune if one an find it
| quote: | Originally posted by goodnet
As for your concern of the buffers - if you have a computer with decent specs, I doubt you'll have much of a problem with buffer underruns. A 2 MB buffer will work excellent with any of the Pentium 4 (or equivalent AMD) with at least 512 MB of RAM, and taking the data off a separate HD (not your system HD).
I have an AMD Athlon 750 Mhz PC w/384 MB of ram & burn off a 2nd IDE HD. Unless I have tons of background processes running, I rarely have a problem burning at 8x - and the buffer underrun protection always saves the day if I do get underruns.
|
Altho , I have a fast machine --P4 3.02 ,S-ATA HDD ,1 Gig Ram... but still sometimes while using my LG CD burner with Nero...The buffer fills up to the max and writing quality detoriates...I use my system very heavily and and there is allot of processes running in the background while i am burning....So just to avoid the under/over run with the dvd-burner i am interested in getting one that has more than 2 megs buffer....I know its not completely avoidable but i am trying to minimize the occurrence...
Now I have to decide whether i should get a Plextor-716a or Pioneer 108...price difference is 80 bucks.....
|
|
Dec-10-2004 00:31
|
|
|
 |
 |
goodnet
•Damn• I look good.
Registered: Nov 2000
Location: Toronto, Canada
|
|
|
The trend has moved towards small on-board buffers for CD/DVD recorders. That's probably because most burning software uses a portion of the physical system RAM to buffer data anyways - and it saves on manufacturing costs im sure.
Even then, burning at 8x is at 11 MB/second a second already. Unless that onboard buffer is 16 or 32 MB, theoretically it shouldn't make a real difference. If the main RAM gets high use from other processes you'll get bottlenecked there either way...
My suggestion with the Pioneer of course, even though it costs significantly less than the Plextor, I don't think its sacrificing the quality as much.
Last edited by goodnet on Dec-10-2004 at 02:28
|
|
Dec-10-2004 00:57
|
|
|
 |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:27.
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
Contact Us - return to tranceaddict
Powered by: Trance Music & vBulletin Forums
Copyright ©2000-2026, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Privacy Statement / DMCA
|