• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

32X Burn times

K

kulki

Senior member
Hi I just bought ta new 32X burner from newegg. However I only have 16X media. I burnt nearly 700MB of data in 4 mins. I was wondering if I were to use a 32X media would my burn times decrease. Also if the drive were to burn at the theoretical maximum speed of 32X how long should it take to burn 700MB. In other words how much does that X stand for in bits/sec?thanks in adavnce
 
I would think that it would reduce because my 16x burner usually takes about the same about of time.
 


<< Hi I just bought ta new 32X burner from newegg. However I only have 16X media. I burnt nearly 700MB of data in 4 mins. I was wondering if I were to use a 32X media would my burn times decrease. Also if the drive were to burn at the theoretical maximum speed of 32X how long should it take to burn 700MB. In other words how much does that X stand for in bits/sec?thanks in adavnce >>




1x=150KB/s

Anything faster than 16x with a very rare exception(the new 40x Plex which can do true 20x) isn't the true speed.

24x burner starts at 16x, switch over to 20x part way through the disc, then switch to 24x and finish at 24x.

The x rating tells you the maximum instantaneous speed the burner could reach.

My 16x takes 5:30 to burn a full 700MB disc including lead in/lead out.
Don't shell out your money on faster media. At BEST you'll save 30seconds per disc.

 
Certain programs will test the media and tell you what speed it can do. I just got a 32X with Nero bundled. I threw in a PNY cheapo 16X disc and it burned fine at 32X. However, I tried a gold CompUSA cheapo disc last night and Nero would only allow me to burn it at 24X.

My times:

78 minutes of music from mp3s, with CD Text and Smart Burn on, took 3:40 to spit it out successfully done.

 


<<

<< Hi I just bought ta new 32X burner from newegg. However I only have 16X media. I burnt nearly 700MB of data in 4 mins. I was wondering if I were to use a 32X media would my burn times decrease. Also if the drive were to burn at the theoretical maximum speed of 32X how long should it take to burn 700MB. In other words how much does that X stand for in bits/sec?thanks in adavnce >>




1x=150KB/s

Anything faster than 16x with a very rare exception(the new 40x Plex which can do true 20x) isn't the true speed.

24x burner starts at 16x, switch over to 20x part way through the disc, then switch to 24x and finish at 24x.

The x rating tells you the maximum instantaneous speed the burner could reach.

My 16x takes 5:30 to burn a full 700MB disc including lead in/lead out.
Don't shell out your money on faster media. At BEST you'll save 30seconds per disc. >>


if thats true then if I were to burn a max speed all along then I should take 700*1024/(32*150*60) = 2:30 mins. Wow so I am not getting anywhere near the maximum proclaimed speed. This sems like a friggin ripoff. I wonder if anyone can point me to a web site which shows how long it takes for the CDRW to get to the max speed of 32X?
Also does lead in and lead out also take place @32X?
 




<< if thats true then if I were to burn a max speed all along then I should take 700*1024/(32*150*60) = 2:30 mins. >>



Thats only if your writer did 32x from core to edge and that is not going to happen, because CD writers aren't designed that way.



<< Wow so I am not getting anywhere near the maximum proclaimed speed. >>



Yes and no...


16x writer: you start driving at 25mph and you continue to drive at 25mph until you reach your destination.

anything faster than 16x writer: you start driving at 25mph in school zone, you get on main road and speed up to 40mph, you get on high way and start driving at 55mph and continue at that pace until you reach your destination.

The maximum speed you reach during the whole journey is 55mph, therefore it can be considred that your maximum speed is 55mph.

Get the concept? Your probably wondering why they do it like this. There is a good technical reason for this, but we're not gonna get into that here.



<<
This sems like a friggin ripoff. I wonder if anyone can point me to a web site which shows how long it takes for the CDRW to get to the max speed of 32X?
Also does lead in and lead out also take place @32X? >>



Your CD drive will reach 32x at 60% of the way into recording or so, but that doesn't give you an average burn time of 32x.
 
And don't forget that, besides burning the data itself, it also burns the TOC, has to read in the files, and has to finish off the burning process. Even if you have a 32X burner it costs time to do those other things.
 
What I hate is the idiocy inherent in the design of CD's. Why, for goodness sake, did they decide to start burning from the center OUT? What they have done is to create a method whereby no matter how much or how little data there is to record, you can always be guarenteed that it will record at the slowest overall rate possible and also be read later on at the slowest rate possible!

I'm just thankful that whoever was working on the spec for CD's wasn't around when people designed how Hard Drives would work!

Joe
 


<< What I hate is the idiocy inherent in the design of CD's. Why, for goodness sake, did they decide to start burning from the center OUT? What they have done is to create a method whereby no matter how much or how little data there is to record, you can always be guarenteed that it will record at the slowest overall rate possible and also be read later on at the slowest rate possible!

I'm just thankful that whoever was working on the spec for CD's wasn't around when people designed how Hard Drives would work! >>



I may be wrong, but wasn't the point of having it start at the center to reduce the seek time?
 


<< I may be wrong, but wasn't the point of having it start at the center to reduce the seek time? >>

I don't know... good question!

How would it reduce seek time? I beleive that the tracks are the same distance apart and if operating at the same speed you would have less sectors per revolution on the inside tracks. I know that CD's change the speed at which they spin depending on the area of the disk they are on, but I can't see the change being enough to radically inprove the seek times... though i could indeed be wrong.

Joe
 


<<

<< I may be wrong, but wasn't the point of having it start at the center to reduce the seek time? >>

I don't know... good question!

How would it reduce seek time? I beleive that the tracks are the same distance apart and if operating at the same speed you would have less sectors per revolution on the inside tracks. I know that CD's change the speed at which they spin depending on the area of the disk they are on, but I can't see the change being enough to radically inprove the seek times... though i could indeed be wrong.

Joe >>

yes, yes you are 😎
 


<<

<< I may be wrong, but wasn't the point of having it start at the center to reduce the seek time? >>

I don't know... good question!

How would it reduce seek time? I beleive that the tracks are the same distance apart and if operating at the same speed you would have less sectors per revolution on the inside tracks. I know that CD's change the speed at which they spin depending on the area of the disk they are on, but I can't see the change being enough to radically inprove the seek times... though i could indeed be wrong.

Joe >>



I would think that seek time is better if it was written from out to in, because the outer area represent greater amount of area per given distance in radius than the inner area, therefore the distance the optical head must displace is lesser.
 
Waaaiit a sec..

What's the "technical reason" that 32x burners aren't really 32x?

What a bunch of crap. I didn't realize that 16x+ burners were "max speed" burners. Kulki, yes - for anything under 16x you can literally take the 150k/sec for 1x and multiply as appropriate to figure out how long it will take you. (or call 1x burning of a full CD to be 74 minutes, therefore 16x burning should be 4.6 minutes)

Back in the good old days, Cd-Rom drives used to read at their rated speed, too. I didn't realize this fallacy had made its way to burners as well - what's the world coming to??

 


<< Waaaiit a sec..

What's the "technical reason" that 32x burners aren't really 32x? >>



The closer you are to outside of the CD, the greater linear velocity you have assuming the angluar velocity is the same.

Plextor's 40x recorder finishes recording at 8,000RPM and probably in 9,000RPM range when it starts recording at 40x.

In order to record at 32x in the beginning , the disc must be spinned at 17,000RPM, which could induce reliability threatening vibration and challenges the mechanical strength of a disc.

56x CD ROM drive reach 56x at the very end of the disc and begins at 21x all while the spindle is spinning at constant 11,200RPM. To reach 56x in the middle, it has to spin the disc at almost 30,000RPM.

Back in the days when read speed was <8x, they changed the angular speed(RPM) to maintain constant linear speed and they could afford to spin the disc at 4240RPM(maximum speed 8x drive spins at the middle).



 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top