Ascended_Saiyan3 said: Fumanchu said: Ascended_Saiyan3 said: Guiding Light said: Linkzmax said: I'm going to re-link this because it seems many missed it. http://www.xbox.com/en-AU/support/xbox360/manuals/xbox360specs.htm "# 12x dual-layer DVD-ROM " It seems MikeB is now admitting it, though some are still claiming otherwise. There's really no point in arguing any further. People are either set in their view, or they'll look at the facts, of which there are plenty. Actually, MikeB is right and wrong (this includes me as well).  The X360 drive IS 8x on DL-DVDs.  This is proven by the transfer rate to HDD from the Gamespot link. The chart in the link below shows what the average transfer rate is for each multiple. http://www.osta.org/technology/dvdqa/dvdqa4.htm This, CLEARLY, lines up with 8x DVD speeds. The wrong part of our thinking was that the AVERAGE transfer speed was lower than it is.  BD drive is still faster at certain sections of the disc, but the 8x DVD read speed gains this back over the remaining area of the disc.   In the end, X360 can only rely on the DVD drive, because all units don't have HDDs (hence the load times in games).  Meanwhile, the PS3 can stream from the BD drive AND the HDD to eliminate load times, in games, altogether.  Also, MUCH data transfer time is lost beyond 6.8GB of data in the name of ejecting and replacing a disc.   Your chart is wrong.  It stipulates average but it is showing the maximum data transfer speeds for each read speed. If 8x = 10.57MB/s maximum the (technical/no optimising) average reverts down to about 6x = 7.93MB/s This is what MikeB has been quoting from Beyond3d.  The HDD install times taken from Gamespot put the AVERAGE at ~11.5MB/s indicating that the maximum should be closer to the 12x speed whilst never actually achieving this speed because MS leaves 500MB off the last (tracks?) of both layers - the fastest speed. MikeB is saying this is unique to the newly added faster drives - but I haven't seen install times from any slower drives out there... With all the information that has been brought to light here it's hard to be skeptical that indeed they are 12x DL-DVD drives.   Upon further review, the chart is correct.  The description of the chart is not.  This is something I should have caught.  I've been up too many hours and currently between too many things.  It's back to my previous post of the X360 drive being 16x DVD drive, which means 12x DL-DVD max transfer speed.

This is not a hard and fast rule!

Most drives from when the Xbox 360 was first made could read pressed DVD-ROM discs at 16x for SL and 12x\8x for DL.

This means nothing though, since it was MOST. I have an Aopen 1648 AAP Pro DVD-ROM drive that was made way before the Xbox 360 first came out that can read at 16x for both SL and DL media.

The point here is that Microsoft doesn't just take a standard DVD-ROM drive and plonk it in an Xbox 360, the firmware is CUSTOM made. The drives aren't the same as their PC counterparts, similar but not the same.

To rely on "oh it's 12x for SL so it must be 8x for DL" is such a laughable argument, its ridiculous and anyone making such argument is basically saying "I have no idea what I'm talking about and am just making a guess"...

 

A GUESS!!!!!! A sodding GUESS!!!!

 

People listen to guesswork over people who actually TEST properly and know what they're talking about.

 

All Xbox 360 drives read DL media at 12x, who the hell would even entertain such a stupid idea that different drives read at different speeds??!!!!!

That would be SCANDALOUS!!!

You think it would take this long for some nobody like MikeB to unearth such a scandalous situation?

Not to mention breaking compatibility, I know myself I have played games with 8x hacked firmware and the odd one has problems streaming data quickly enough (no, not GTAIV style, I'm talking much worse).

 

 

I really really wish people would post objectively, you actually seem to be fair if a little biased, but at least your trying to "get it".

 

 

This thread is the internet in a nutshell and why people have such dislike for people on it, nobody listens to the person who makes sense.

 

Guiding Light said: Ascended_Saiyan3 said: Fumanchu said: Ascended_Saiyan3 said: Guiding Light said: Linkzmax said: I'm going to re-link this because it seems many missed it. http://www.xbox.com/en-AU/support/xbox360/manuals/xbox360specs.htm "# 12x dual-layer DVD-ROM " It seems MikeB is now admitting it, though some are still claiming otherwise. There's really no point in arguing any further. People are either set in their view, or they'll look at the facts, of which there are plenty. Actually, MikeB is right and wrong (this includes me as well).  The X360 drive IS 8x on DL-DVDs.  This is proven by the transfer rate to HDD from the Gamespot link. The chart in the link below shows what the average transfer rate is for each multiple. http://www.osta.org/technology/dvdqa/dvdqa4.htm This, CLEARLY, lines up with 8x DVD speeds. The wrong part of our thinking was that the AVERAGE transfer speed was lower than it is.  BD drive is still faster at certain sections of the disc, but the 8x DVD read speed gains this back over the remaining area of the disc.   In the end, X360 can only rely on the DVD drive, because all units don't have HDDs (hence the load times in games).  Meanwhile, the PS3 can stream from the BD drive AND the HDD to eliminate load times, in games, altogether.  Also, MUCH data transfer time is lost beyond 6.8GB of data in the name of ejecting and replacing a disc.   Your chart is wrong.  It stipulates average but it is showing the maximum data transfer speeds for each read speed. If 8x = 10.57MB/s maximum the (technical/no optimising) average reverts down to about 6x = 7.93MB/s This is what MikeB has been quoting from Beyond3d.  The HDD install times taken from Gamespot put the AVERAGE at ~11.5MB/s indicating that the maximum should be closer to the 12x speed whilst never actually achieving this speed because MS leaves 500MB off the last (tracks?) of both layers - the fastest speed. MikeB is saying this is unique to the newly added faster drives - but I haven't seen install times from any slower drives out there... With all the information that has been brought to light here it's hard to be skeptical that indeed they are 12x DL-DVD drives.   Upon further review, the chart is correct.  The description of the chart is not.  This is something I should have caught.  I've been up too many hours and currently between too many things.  It's back to my previous post of the X360 drive being 16x DVD drive, which means 12x DL-DVD max transfer speed.   This is not a hard and fast rule! Most drives from when the Xbox 360 was first made could read pressed DVD-ROM discs at 16x for SL and 12x8x for DL. This means nothing though, since it was MOST. I have an Aopen 1648 AAP Pro DVD-ROM drive that was made way before the Xbox 360 first came out that can read at 16x for both SL and DL media. The point here is that Microsoft doesn't just take a standard DVD-ROM drive and plonk it in an Xbox 360, the firmware is CUSTOM made. The drives aren't the same as their PC counterparts, similar but not the same. To rely on "oh it's 12x for SL so it must be 8x for DL" is such a laughable argument, its ridiculous and anyone making such argument is basically saying "I have no idea what I'm talking about and am just making a guess"...   A GUESS!!!!!! A sodding GUESS!!!!   People listen to guesswork over people who actually TEST properly and know what they're talking about.   All Xbox 360 drives read DL media at 12x, who the hell would even entertain such a stupid idea that different drives read at different speeds??!!!!! That would be SCANDALOUS!!! You think it would take this long for some nobody like MikeB to unearth such a scandalous situation? Not to mention breaking compatibility, I know myself I have played games with 8x hacked firmware and the odd one has problems streaming data quickly enough (no, not GTAIV style, I'm talking much worse).     I really really wish people would post objectively, you actually seem to be fair if a little biased, but at least your trying to "get it".     This thread is the internet in a nutshell and why people have such dislike for people on it, nobody listens to the person who makes sense.

According to several owners, "Dual Layer discs is just under 8x (actually 3-7x) but for SL it can do 16x."

http://74.125.47.132/search?q=cache:I3DLF5uiEmQJ:club.cdfreaks.com/f61/if-you-have-aopen-1648-aap-read-here-130692/+%22Aopen+1648+AAP+Pro%22+16x+single+layer&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&client=firefox-a

 

 

Ascended_Saiyan3 said: Guiding Light said: Ascended_Saiyan3 said: Fumanchu said: Ascended_Saiyan3 said: Guiding Light said: Linkzmax said: I'm going to re-link this because it seems many missed it. http://www.xbox.com/en-AU/support/xbox360/manuals/xbox360specs.htm "# 12x dual-layer DVD-ROM " It seems MikeB is now admitting it, though some are still claiming otherwise. There's really no point in arguing any further. People are either set in their view, or they'll look at the facts, of which there are plenty. Actually, MikeB is right and wrong (this includes me as well).  The X360 drive IS 8x on DL-DVDs.  This is proven by the transfer rate to HDD from the Gamespot link. The chart in the link below shows what the average transfer rate is for each multiple. http://www.osta.org/technology/dvdqa/dvdqa4.htm This, CLEARLY, lines up with 8x DVD speeds. The wrong part of our thinking was that the AVERAGE transfer speed was lower than it is.  BD drive is still faster at certain sections of the disc, but the 8x DVD read speed gains this back over the remaining area of the disc.   In the end, X360 can only rely on the DVD drive, because all units don't have HDDs (hence the load times in games).  Meanwhile, the PS3 can stream from the BD drive AND the HDD to eliminate load times, in games, altogether.  Also, MUCH data transfer time is lost beyond 6.8GB of data in the name of ejecting and replacing a disc.   Your chart is wrong.  It stipulates average but it is showing the maximum data transfer speeds for each read speed. If 8x = 10.57MB/s maximum the (technical/no optimising) average reverts down to about 6x = 7.93MB/s This is what MikeB has been quoting from Beyond3d.  The HDD install times taken from Gamespot put the AVERAGE at ~11.5MB/s indicating that the maximum should be closer to the 12x speed whilst never actually achieving this speed because MS leaves 500MB off the last (tracks?) of both layers - the fastest speed. MikeB is saying this is unique to the newly added faster drives - but I haven't seen install times from any slower drives out there... With all the information that has been brought to light here it's hard to be skeptical that indeed they are 12x DL-DVD drives.   Upon further review, the chart is correct.  The description of the chart is not.  This is something I should have caught.  I've been up too many hours and currently between too many things.  It's back to my previous post of the X360 drive being 16x DVD drive, which means 12x DL-DVD max transfer speed.   This is not a hard and fast rule! Most drives from when the Xbox 360 was first made could read pressed DVD-ROM discs at 16x for SL and 12x8x for DL. This means nothing though, since it was MOST. I have an Aopen 1648 AAP Pro DVD-ROM drive that was made way before the Xbox 360 first came out that can read at 16x for both SL and DL media. The point here is that Microsoft doesn't just take a standard DVD-ROM drive and plonk it in an Xbox 360, the firmware is CUSTOM made. The drives aren't the same as their PC counterparts, similar but not the same. To rely on "oh it's 12x for SL so it must be 8x for DL" is such a laughable argument, its ridiculous and anyone making such argument is basically saying "I have no idea what I'm talking about and am just making a guess"...   A GUESS!!!!!! A sodding GUESS!!!!   People listen to guesswork over people who actually TEST properly and know what they're talking about.   All Xbox 360 drives read DL media at 12x, who the hell would even entertain such a stupid idea that different drives read at different speeds??!!!!! That would be SCANDALOUS!!! You think it would take this long for some nobody like MikeB to unearth such a scandalous situation? Not to mention breaking compatibility, I know myself I have played games with 8x hacked firmware and the odd one has problems streaming data quickly enough (no, not GTAIV style, I'm talking much worse).     I really really wish people would post objectively, you actually seem to be fair if a little biased, but at least your trying to "get it".     This thread is the internet in a nutshell and why people have such dislike for people on it, nobody listens to the person who makes sense.   According to several owners, "Dual Layer discs is just under 8x (actually 3-7x) but for SL it can do 16x." http://74.125.47.132/search?q=cache:I3DLF5uiEmQJ:club.cdfreaks.com/f61/if-you-have-aopen-1648-aap-read-here-130692/+%22Aopen+1648+AAP+Pro%22+16x+single+layer&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&client=firefox-a

 

 No

 

(Edit - The link you provided doesn't even say that, it has people comparing their NEC drives that do the speeds you talk!!!)

For PRESSED media (not DVD-\+R) it is 16x for both as long as the pressed media isn't DVD-Video which has a riplock impossed by the DVD forum to prevent easy copying of discs.

HOWEVER...

ImgBurn\DVD Decrypter is able to read at 16x for DVD+R\-R\DVD-Video using some special speed read hack.

I promise you I do my homework and it was my whole reason for buying the drive in the 1st place all those years ago.

Why are even bothering to argue that miniscule point which you were wrong about, can I take it that you agree with the rest and are ready to accept I am right?

You can't win ;)

Ascended_Saiyan3 said: According to several owners, "Dual Layer discs is just under 8x (actually 3-7x) but for SL it can do 16x." http://74.125.47.132/search?q=cache:I3DLF5uiEmQJ:club.cdfreaks.com/f61/if-you-have-aopen-1648-aap-read-here-130692/+%22Aopen+1648+AAP+Pro%22+16x+single+layer&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&client=firefox-a

Would those "several owners" be the one guy complaining about his NEC ND-3500 DL-drive speed and the several others be the ones saying that's why they went with the AOpen drive because the DL-drive speed is faster???

 

:) it certainly would!!!

This is so funny.

Wow! Faith in humanity restored.

Turns out MikeB ridicolous statements and massive spinstering promoting sony was just because of greed.

The fact MikeB has a vested interest in the development of Sony related business should be clearly known by everybody. He should put it on his sig so people can evaluate his posts accordingly.

However, admitting to it would defeat his point, that of promoting Sony through trolling, lies and deceit. 

Considering banned gaffers usually end up at evilbore or quartertothree it's a shame we got such a bad luck and now we have to sit through his inane rants built from his own vested interest on Sony.

Bitmap Frogs said: Wow! Faith in humanity restored. Turns out MikeB ridicolous statements and massive spinstering promoting sony was just because of greed. The fact MikeB has a vested interest in the development of Sony related business should be clearly known by everybody. He should put it on his sig so people can evaluate his posts accordingly. However, admitting to it would defeat his point, that of promoting Sony through trolling, lies and deceit.  Considering banned gaffers usually end up at evilbore or quartertothree it's a shame we got such a bad luck and now we have to sit through his inane rants built from his own vested interest on Sony.

Yep.  He seems to be smartly laying low on here at the moment.  But he is still on fire with the trolling off this site like this:

http://amigaworld.net/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?mode=viewtopic&topic_id=28162&forum=4&start=320&viewmode=flat&order=0#490647

 

Ausfalcon said: Bitmap Frogs said: Wow! Faith in humanity restored. Turns out MikeB ridicolous statements and massive spinstering promoting sony was just because of greed. The fact MikeB has a vested interest in the development of Sony related business should be clearly known by everybody. He should put it on his sig so people can evaluate his posts accordingly. However, admitting to it would defeat his point, that of promoting Sony through trolling, lies and deceit.  Considering banned gaffers usually end up at evilbore or quartertothree it's a shame we got such a bad luck and now we have to sit through his inane rants built from his own vested interest on Sony. Yep.  He seems to be smartly laying low on here at the moment.  But he is still on fire with the trolling off this site like this: http://amigaworld.net/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?mode=viewtopic&topic_id=28162&forum=4&start=320&viewmode=flat&order=0#490647

 

He always does that after a good scolding. Give it some time for the forum to forget it and then bam, time to post again the same lies.

Oh wow, thanks for the link. The guy's a dedicated marketer.

@ Bitmap Frogs

I usually don't want to question someone's intelligence in public, but considering your attacks I will make an exception.

A marketer would never try to reach the masses through hidden discussions on a small Amiga forum. People will specifically have to look for it or be linked to those discussions like is the case in here (which you applaud, not me).

On topic:

I did a little bit of research and albeit there are some small differences between drive specifications, it seems all 360 drives are 16 speed drives (SL).

Sadly there seems to be no manuals online currently with regard to the 360 drives, but I think it can be assumed they function similarly as other 16x drives.

Some specifications documents regarding Toshiba drives:

http://www.toshiba.com/taissdd/products.shtml

5,540 - 13,500 KByte/s (DVD, Dual Layer) for one of the x16 DVD drives.

Of course considering the 6.8 game data capacity, which is much lower than for a full normal DL DVD, worst case seektimes and average data transfer will be a little better. If they would have gone for 5 GB for example, they could have improved the averages further, for example.