iXBT Labs - Computer Hardware in Detail

Platform

Video

Multimedia

Mobile

Other

IDE CD-RW Drives Roundup
(Part IX)

July 1, 2001



Mitsumi CR-4805TE and Ricoh RW7083A

When testing modern high-speed recorders, we have unintentionally left entry-level CD-RW drives aside. But it is not a sign of neglect of the simplest solutions in the field of CD recording. The technological progress is moving with rapid strides, and even the latest model today will be considered a middle-level system tomorrow. Let's take, for example the CD-RW drive market. 8x recorders appeared not so long ago in our computers, but today it is the minimum you can buy on the market. 12x drives become more and more popular among users who have decided upon an upgrade or who buy a CD-RW drive for the first time.

Today, by the example of two entry-level models, we will try to fill up the gap in the reviews dealing with not very expensive CD-RW drives.

Mitsumi CR-4805TE

Ricoh RW7083A

Test results

CDWinBench 99 CD-ROM Transfer Rate

For the performance comparison in reading operations, apart from the CD-ROM Teac 540E, we have chosen the TEAC CD-W58E recorder as the closest competitor.

All CD-RW drives performed close to each other in this test. The RW7083A is a bit ahead leaving behind the Mitsumi and TEAC W58E.

The situation is similar except the fact that all recorders have left behind the CD-ROM TEAC.

The CPU utilization was:

A rather high performance of the Ricoh RW7083A requires large processor resources.

CDWinBench 99 CD-ROM Access Time

The leadership in this test is taken by the TEAC W58E: its access time is unachievable even for the CD-540E. The Mitsumi has shown 105 ms: although it is at the bottom of the table, the result is quite good for a so cheap model.

CDWinBench 99 CPU Utilization

Despite a high CPU utilization at the continuous data transfer, the total load of the Ricoh RW7083A is the least among all contestants. The TEAC W58E and Mitsumi CR-4805TE go on a par.

Time taken for CD recording

Recording of the CD-R Philips Silver (cyanine /TY/, 16x rated record speed) 8X

CD-RW drive Time (min.)
TEAC CD-W58E
10.33
Mitsumi CR-4805TE
10.41
Ricoh RW7083A
10.56

The TEAC W58E was first to reach the finish. The difference between it and the Ricoh, which turned out to be the last, is just a bit more than 20 sec. Whether it is much or not depends on your needs.

Recording of the CD-R Mirex (phthalocyanine, 12x rated record speed) 12X

CD-RW drive Time (min.)
Mitsumi CR-4805TE
10.48
Ricoh RW7083A
10.51

The phthalocyanine CD-R disc is recorded by the Ricoh much faster. It allowed the drive to perform very close to the CR-4805TE.

Recording of the "noname"* CD-R (cyanine, the rated record speed is unknown) 4X

CD-RW drive Time (min.)
TEAC CD-W58E
20.49
Mitsumi CR-4805TE
21.08
Ricoh RW7083A
20.18

*For the tests we used the previous "technological" noname CD-R discs with a light cyanine active layer (close to the Taiyo Yuden in color, while today's discs are dark-blue, close to Verbatim CD-R discs).

At the 4x record speed the W58E has fallen behind the Ricoh 7083A. The Mitsumi turned out to be the slowest in recording of cyanine technological discs, having lagged behind the RW7083A nearly by a minute.

Time spent for full formatting of a CD-RW disc in UDF format

Philips CD-RW 4x

CD-RW drive Time (min.)
TEAC CD-W58E
29.46
Mitsumi CR-4805TE
28.10
Ricoh RW7083A
24.22

Ricoh CD-RW 8x

CD-RW drive Time (min.)
TEAC CD-W58E
17.22
Ricoh RW7083A
16.08

The RW7083A won both in formatting of usual 1X-4X CD-RWs and in operations with High-Speed rewritable discs. We have also conducted experiments under the control of the InCD program from ahead Software. The W58E's results have become a little better, and the scores of the RW7083A are now better by a quarter as compared with those achieved with the DirectCD. The Mitsumi CR-4805TE works equally with the DirectCD and InCD, losing to the TEAC but winning from the RW7083A.

Recording of a CD-RW disc (UDF)

Philips CD-RW 4x

CD-RW drive Time (min.)
TEAC CD-W58E
19.49
Mitsumi CR-4805TE
20.12
Ricoh RW7083A
20.35

CD-RW Ricoh 8x

CD-RW drive Time (min.)
TEAC CD-W58E
11.03
Ricoh RW7083A
12.16

The TEAC deals much easier with recording of CD-RW discs. The Ricoh has performed even worse than the Mitsumi. The InCD allowed the RW7083A to come very close to the TEAC, but the 15-20sec difference didn't allowed the Ricoh to win in this test.

BLER factor of CD-R discs recorded with the Ricoh drive.

CD-R disc, record speed Ricoh RW7083A Mitsumi CR-4805TE
Philips Silver, 8x
2-5
8-11
Mirex, 8x
3-7
8-11
"noname", 4x
56-61
8-11

When comparing the results obtained with the TEAC W58E drive,

CD-R disc, record speed Philips Silver Premium, 16x Mirex, 8x "noname", 4x
BLER
8-13
5-11
36-42

(for these tests we used a device described in the fifth part of our review)

we can see that the Ricoh 7083A quality is just excellent. Nevertheless, the TEAC takes easier such obscure things as "noname" CD-R discs which sell cheap in bulk. The Mitsumi CR-4805TE writes a bit worse than its competitors but it is priced less as well...

CDSpeed 99

The graph of reading of the Philips Silver Premium (8x record speed)

Ricoh RW7083A

Mitsumi CR-4805TE

The graph of reading of the Mirex (8x record speed)

Ricoh RW7083A

Mitsumi CR-4805TE

The graph of reading of the "noname" (4x record speed)

Ricoh RW7083A

Mitsumi CR-4805TE

Both drives have different graphs of reading, typical of normal 32x models. A slope of the graph in case of reading of the "noname" disc by the Ricoh drive is explained by higher requirements of the RW7083A to disc quality, and by the unstable recording of the disc on edges.

CD Speed 99 test results of the recorded CD-R Philips Silver.

  Ricoh RW7083A Mitsumi CR-4805TE
Average
24.18x
23.98x
Random Seek
97 ms
126 ms
SpinUp Time
3.01 sec
2.56 sec
SpinDown Time
3.55 sec
4.34 sec
Disc Eject Time
1.12 sec
1.36 sec
Disc Load Time
1.08 sec
1.04 sec
Disc Recognition Time
8.50 sec
5.93 sec

CD Speed 99 test results of the recorded Mirex CD-R discs.

  Ricoh RW7083A Mitsumi CR-4805TE
Average
24.16x
23.94x
Random Seek
101 ms
123 ms
SpinUp Time
3.09 sec
2.49 sec
SpinDown Time
3.52 sec
4.30 sec
Disc Eject Time
1.11 sec
1.36 sec
Disc Load Time
1.09 sec
1.02 sec
Disc Recognition Time
8.52 sec
5.82 sec

CD Speed 99 test results of the recorded "noname" CD-R discs.

  Ricoh RW7083A Mitsumi CR-4805TE
Average
24.12x
23.96x
Random Seek
184 ms
135 ms
SpinUp Time
3.17 sec
2.53 sec
SpinDown Time
3.66 sec
4.38 sec
Disc Eject Time
1.12 sec
1.40 sec
Disc Load Time
1.09 sec
1.12 sec
Disc Recognition Time
8.81 sec
6.07 sec

The results of both models don't differ much. But the RW7083A is still leading in the most of cases except one with the "noname" CD-R where the Ricoh showed too high seek time.

CD Quality Check test results of the CD-RW (UDF) discs recorded at 4X.

  Ricoh RW7083A Mitsumi CR-4805TE
Read speed
13.96
12.46

CD Quality Check test results of the CD-RW (UDF) discs recorded at 8X.

  Ricoh RW7083A
Read speed
14.24

CD Quality Check test results of the recorded CD-RW (ISO) discs.

  Ricoh RW7083A Mitsumi CR-4805TE
Read speed
18.64
16.88

Like in all previous tests, the Ricoh performed very well. The Mitsumi has lagged behind by a little margin.

Read speed of the recorded CD-R Philips Silver /CD Quality Check/

  Ricoh RW7083A Mitsumi CR-4805TE
Read speed
23.02
22.76
Read speed (TEAC CD-540E)
18.84
18.73

Read speed of the recorded CD-R Mirex /CD Quality Check/

  Ricoh RW7083A Mitsumi CR-4805TE
Read speed
22.96
22.56
Read speed (TEAC CD-540E)
18.77
18.68

Read speed of the recorded CD-R "noname" /CD Quality Check/

  Ricoh RW7083A Mitsumi CR-4805TE
Read speed
22.91
22.62
Read speed (TEAC CD-540E)
18.78
18.70

The Ricoh's advantage in the CD Quality Check test is practically unnoticeable, and its leadership is out of the question.

Quality of the recorded CD-R Philips Silver /CD-ROM Drive Analyzer/

Mitsumi CR-4805TE

TEAC CD-540E

Ricoh RW7083A

TEAC CD-540E

Quality of the recorded CD-R Mirex /CD-ROM Drive Analyzer/

Mitsumi CR-4805TE

TEAC CD-540E

Ricoh RW7083A

TEAC CD-540E

Quality of the recorded "noname" CD-R disc /CD-ROM Drive Analyzer/

Mitsumi CR-4805TE

TEAC CD-540E

Ricoh RW7083A

TEAC CD-540E

The Mitsumi has not very even, gradually descending graphs. The Ricoh's graphs have big notches, but at the same time it reads at a greater speed.

Sound track extraction from audio CDs (CDDAE 99)

Ricoh RW7083A

  Piano Favorites Acoustic Planet vol.2 Bloodhound Gang "Greatest Hits"
Average extraction speed
13.4X
19.3X
16.9X
Total errors*
14.67%
8.22%
0.00%

Sound track extraction from audio CDs (CDDAE 99)

Mitsumi CR-4805TE

  Piano Favorites Acoustic Planet vol.2 Bloodhound Gang "Greatest Hits"
Average extraction speed
15.9X
7.3X
7.3X
Total errors*
7.37%
5.40%
0.00%

* - 7.37% means that the drive extracted 7.37% of the CD with errors.

Looking at the track extraction results it seems that the Mitsumi works slowly, but with the less number of errors, the Ricoh, on the contrary, operates fast and there are more errors. But if we limited the extraction speed of the RW7083A, we get not more errors than of the CR-4805TE. At the same time, we will have some speed reserve for high-quality discs.

Advanced DAE Quality

Ricoh RW7083A

Offset 412 bytes (103 samples)
Sequential Read Test Average Speed: 22.32 X
Data Errors: 0
Sync Errors: 0
Harmonica Read Test Average Access Time: 166 ms
Data Errors: 0
Sync Errors: 0

Total Data Errors: 0
Total Sync Errors: 0
Quality Score: 100.0

On The Fly Copying Simulation Copying at 1 X
OK
Copying at 2 X
OK
Copying at 4 X
OK
Copying at 6 X
OK
Copying at 8 X
OK
Copying at 10 X
OK
Copying at 12 X
OK
Copying at 16 X
too slow
CD Text Drive cannot read CD Text information
Subchannel Data Test 1
Track (01): 01
Relative position (01:05.00): 01:05.00
Absolute position (01:07.00): 01:07.00
Index (5): 5
Test 2
Track (17): 17
Relative position (01:33.00): 01:33.00
Absolute position (33:35.00): 33:35.00
Index (1): 1
Test 3
Track (36): 36
Relative position (00:00.00): 00:00.00
Absolute position (70:02.00): 70:02.00
Index (1): 1
Leadin Drive cannot read data from the Leadin
Leadout Drive cannot read data from the Leadout

Mitsumi CR-4805TE

Offset 2584 bytes (646 samples)
Sequential Read Test Average Speed: 17.14 X
Data Errors: 0
Sync Errors: 0
Harmonica Read Test Average Access Time: 260 ms
Data Errors: 0
Sync Errors: 0

Total Data Errors: 0
Total Sync Errors: 0
Quality Score: 100.0

On The Fly Copying Simulation Copying at 1 X
OK
Copying at 2 X
OK
Copying at 4 X
OK
Copying at 6 X
OK
Copying at 8 X
OK
Copying at 10 X
OK
Copying at 12 X
too slow
Copying at 16 X
too slow
CD Text Drive cannot read CD Text information
Subchannel Data Test 1
Track (01): 01
Relative position (01:05.00): 00:00.01 -> incorrect!
Relative position (01:05.00): 00:00.01 -> incorrect!
Index (5): 5
Test 2
Track (17): 17
Relative position (01:05.00): 00:00.01 -> incorrect!
Relative position (01:05.00): 00:00.01 -> incorrect!
Index (1): 102 -> incorrect!
Test 3
Track (36): 00 incorrect!
Relative position (00:00.00): 00:02.74 -> incorrect!
Absolute position (70:02.00): 03:23.18 -> incorrect!
Index (1): 0 -> incorrect!
Leadin Drive cannot read data from the Leadin
Leadout Drive cannot read data from the Leadout

The detailed information on the tested parameters are given in the help file to the CDSpeed99 test program. If you don't need the utility, then here you can find the HTMl help file.

Judging by the results of this test, the Ricoh RW7083A is a more appropriate drive for implementing recording and for working with Audio CDs: quite good access time, a small offset value, a correct operation with subchannel data (unlike the Mitsumi). The only drawback is lack of possibility (according to the Advanced DAE Quality Test) to read the discs which contain data in the CD Text format.

Overburn

Ricoh RW7083A

CD-R Additional disc length obtained Total length of the recorded data
Philips Silver Premium 16x (TY)
2 min. 21 sec.
77:04.50
Mirex 650 MBytes
2 min. 54 sec.
77:24.62
90 min Rostok Media
 
91 min. 22 sec.

Mitsumi CR-4805TE

CD-R Additional disc length obtained Total length of the recorded data
Philips Silver Premium 16x (TY)
2 min. 18 sec.
77:01.22
Mirex 650 MBytes
2 min. 50 sec.
77:20.41
90 min Rostok Media
 
90 min. 44 sec.

Direct copying from recorded CDs to a hard disc

Copying of the recorded CD-R Philips Silver

CD-RW drive Time (min.)
Ricoh RW7083A
5.52
Mitsumi CR-4805TE
6.30

Copying of the recorded CD-R Mirex

CD-RW drive Time (min.)
Ricoh RW7083A
5.54
Mitsumi CR-4805TE
6.23

Copying of the recorded CD-R "noname"

CD-RW drive Time (min.)
Ricoh RW7083A
6.23
Mitsumi CR-4805TE
7.12

Reading of damaged CDs

Ricoh RW7083A

"Golden" CD

Scratched disc

On the scratched disc a saw is especially well seen on the last parts. But each time after the drive fixes an error and the speed lowers, it tries to lift the latter up to the initial level. That is why the graph demonstrates such a high amplitude of splashes.

75% of the disc was read successfully.

Mitsumi CR-4805TE

"Golden" CD

Scratched disc

Slow, but accurate are the right words for operation of the Mitsumi. Nevertheless, having come across the first absolutely unreadable area, the drive fails to cope with it, that is why the CR-4805TE couldn't read the damaged disc by more than 60%.

Conclusion and summary.

Ricoh RW7083A

This model is a deserved bestseller in the Ricoh series. The recorder copes perfectly with reading and recording. But you should remember that you will achieve the best results only with high-quality discs. Operation with CD-RW discs is not that bad. Comparing the recorder with the TEAC W58E, it is difficult to say which of them is more attractive as far as cost, performance and record quality are concerned. I think that the choice should be based on your preferences and on a warranty period. The connection of Samsung to the production of this model might scare away many users. It is difficult to make those people who are prejudiced against the Korean company change their mind. In this case one should remember that there is always an alternative.

Mitsumi CR-4805TE

It is an average recorder with not bad possibilities and a very low price. The CR-4805TE will perfectly suit tight-budget users. Besides, you should keep this model in mind if you want to replace your CD-ROM drive. It will be useful if you built up a computer from the beginning, and a DVD drive is not a necessary feature. Do not pay too much attention to a low reliability of the Mitsumi drive because it will become obsolete much faster that it will reach its death.

If you are mostly going to record and process audio CDs, you'd better look at more expensive solutions such as Ricoh RW7083A or TEAC W58E.

Test programs:


Write a comment below. No registration needed!


Article navigation:



blog comments powered by Disqus

  Most Popular Reviews More    RSS  

AMD Phenom II X4 955, Phenom II X4 960T, Phenom II X6 1075T, and Intel Pentium G2120, Core i3-3220, Core i5-3330 Processors

Comparing old, cheap solutions from AMD with new, budget offerings from Intel.
February 1, 2013 · Processor Roundups

Inno3D GeForce GTX 670 iChill, Inno3D GeForce GTX 660 Ti Graphics Cards

A couple of mid-range adapters with original cooling systems.
January 30, 2013 · Video cards: NVIDIA GPUs

Creative Sound Blaster X-Fi Surround 5.1

An external X-Fi solution in tests.
September 9, 2008 · Sound Cards

AMD FX-8350 Processor

The first worthwhile Piledriver CPU.
September 11, 2012 · Processors: AMD

Consumed Power, Energy Consumption: Ivy Bridge vs. Sandy Bridge

Trying out the new method.
September 18, 2012 · Processors: Intel
  Latest Reviews More    RSS  

i3DSpeed, September 2013

Retested all graphics cards with the new drivers.
Oct 18, 2013 · 3Digests

i3DSpeed, August 2013

Added new benchmarks: BioShock Infinite and Metro: Last Light.
Sep 06, 2013 · 3Digests

i3DSpeed, July 2013

Added the test results of NVIDIA GeForce GTX 760 and AMD Radeon HD 7730.
Aug 05, 2013 · 3Digests

Gainward GeForce GTX 650 Ti BOOST 2GB Golden Sample Graphics Card

An excellent hybrid of GeForce GTX 650 Ti and GeForce GTX 660.
Jun 24, 2013 · Video cards: NVIDIA GPUs

i3DSpeed, May 2013

Added the test results of NVIDIA GeForce GTX 770/780.
Jun 03, 2013 · 3Digests
  Latest News More    RSS  

Platform  ·  Video  ·  Multimedia  ·  Mobile  ·  Other  ||  About us & Privacy policy  ·  Twitter  ·  Facebook


Copyright © Byrds Research & Publishing, Ltd., 1997–2011. All rights reserved.