 |
|
|
|
|||||||
| View Poll Results: so which is better? | |||
| data-burned games |
   
|
8 | 72.73% |
| iso-burned games |
  
|
3 | 27.27% |
| Voters: 11. You may not vote on this poll | |||
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
| |
|
|
|
|||||||
| View Poll Results: so which is better? | |||
| data-burned games |
|
8 | 72.73% |
| iso-burned games |
|
3 | 27.27% |
| Voters: 11. You may not vote on this poll | |||
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
|
#19
21-11-2003, 13:28
|
||||
|
||||
|
Can someone post a link to where I can see the results of the laser tests,
I have never before heard of a laser working harder trying to read a data burn vs a iso burn, that dosen't really make sense to me but I AM no expert!! So you mean that the laser has some kind of adjustment that is used when it determines the media that is wriiten or is that the there is more reading time involved with a data burn?
I have done both types I have created iso's and data burn and decided to stick with data burn beacuse if the higher success rate 100% so far probably 85% with iso's. Then I decided to do a side by side comparison not exactly scientific but the best I could do. I noticed no difference in load times no noises.
__________________
Now running: Wndows XP Athlon 1800 processor 1 Gig of RAM XBox v1.1 Xecutor2 Lite 120G Hd 60G Hd LG dvd burner And a many thanks to all those here at fileforums View my set up at http://groups.msn.com/Minionssystempicks/systempics1.msnw 
|
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Threaded Mode