Six-month rewritable DVD endurance test crowns winner with 1,000 rewrites, shows the best discs are no longer manufactured — six month of tests find TDK is a clear leader, Verbatim and Memorex didn’t do well
The scale of tests was admittedly restricted due to both time and resources.
Get Tom's Hardware's best news and in-depth reviews, straight to your inbox.
You are now subscribed
Your newsletter sign-up was successful
A tech enthusiast has shared his DVD rewritable endurance findings. In an extensive blog post, Dr. Gough Lui describes his test methodology and discusses the results in detail. Sadly, the best DVD rewritables from the six months of tests Dr. Gough completed - TDK branded discs - are no longer being manufactured.
Dr. Gough first explains how he managed to run the tests, which ran for a solid half-year. The test process was automated using a Python script, as even testing one DVD over 1,000 cycles would take ~21 days. The script also recorded results, with screenshots included.
An as-new condition Lite-On iHAS120 6 was the drive model to run the tests. In its favor, it supports error scanning with jitter, and the doctor had two spares. After some initial setup steps, it was decided to use two of these drives in parallel so that the test suite wouldn’t use up a whole year…
Article continues belowEach test loop included a disc write, then data verification, a transfer rate test (RTT), a quality scan to check for PI/PO errors and jitter, and an erase cycle. This loop would continue until verification failure. “The criterion for disc failure is set as the first verification run that fails due to an error,” the doctor wrote. The resulting figure is accurate ±3 cycles.
Dr. Gough admits there were limitations to the experiment and methodology. Firstly, the life cycle result “is valid only for the combination of burner and disc tested,” says the doctor. Moreover, limited resources and time meant that only a few DVD samples were put through the test regime (as charted below). It is made clear that each row of the test summary is indicative of a single sample of each DVD rewritable available. Another fly in the test ointment was that “some discs return very poor error scan values but remain readable and vice-versa.”
Dr. Gough then goes through each of the sample disks, sharing plenty of commentary on the finer points of the results and how they aligned with expectations. The source also includes an interesting side-quest, where the good doctor uses a Nu Tech DDW-082 drive, which could purportedly revive rewritables using a function called ‘DC Erase.’
The TDK 2x DVD-RW (TDK502sakuM3) was the only disc to survive beyond 1,000 cycles of the testing (or 2,000 if you count the write and erase separately). It was clearly the top performer. This disc led the charge for the DVD-RW camp against the DVD+RW side.
Get Tom's Hardware's best news and in-depth reviews, straight to your inbox.
Also, on the – vs + topic, it was interesting to see the former dominate the top of the table. There are so many reasons this may be the case in a test of limited scope like this. For example, the ‘minus’ media might just work a bit better with this Lite-On drive hardware/firmware than ‘plus’ media. Or the triumphant ‘minus’ rewritables had some benefits with respect to degradation of the phase layer material.
As for current stocks of DVD-RW and DVD+RW discs, only Verbatim, Maxell, Ridata, and SmartBuy-branded rewritable media are available at Amazon.
Follow Tom's Hardware on Google News, or add us as a preferred source, to get our latest news, analysis, & reviews in your feeds.

Mark Tyson is a news editor at Tom's Hardware. He enjoys covering the full breadth of PC tech; from business and semiconductor design to products approaching the edge of reason.
-
wussupi83 There's something fun about imagining a world where disc technology stuck around a little longer. I don't think I ever rewrote a CD or DVD more than a few times before disc spindles became fairly inexpensive. It never crossed my mind how many rewrites a disk could handle. This was a fun thought.Reply -
usertests Reply
In the late 2000s, 1 TB optical discs were developed in the lab, and I remember the hype around 6 TB "Holographic Versatile Discs". The now-discontinued Archival Disc was introduced in 2015 with 300/500 GB capacities (I don't think 1 TB was ever made). There was some interest in pushing towards an 8K UHD consumer disc that could have used any of these >128 GB (BDXL) capacities, but streaming, industry greed, and admittedly low adoption of 8K have terminated that future.wussupi83 said:There's something fun about imagining a world where disc technology stuck around a little longer. I don't think I ever rewrote a CD or DVD more than a few times before disc spindles became fairly inexpensive. It never crossed my mind how many rewrites a disk could handle. This was a fun thought.
Now we live in a horrible world far removed from the nostalgic times of a CD storing more than your HDD. -
magnetite I'm surprised that there isn't a use for M-Discs for archiving media and content. Streaming might have taken over physical media for viewing media, but there's still a need for reliable archival media formats to preserve historical digital information.Reply -
USAFRet Reply
If people thought there is a viable use, they would use them.magnetite said:I'm surprised that there isn't a use for M-Discs for archiving media and content. Streaming might have taken over physical media for viewing media, but there's still a need for reliable archival media formats to preserve historical digital information.
Do you? I sure don't. -
bit_user That's insane! I pretty much avoided RW media, for fear that its cold storage endurance would be lower and assumed the number of viable rewrites was probably down in the dozens.Reply
Another reason not to use RW optical media is that each usage iteration will typically involve handling it. For the best data integrity, you always want your discs to be pristine, when writing!! Any dirt, dust, oil, etc. will cast shadows or refract the laser, during the writing process. Those bits will never reach the dye layer. So, even if you then clean it, you won't get those bits back.
The more contamination there is, the more reliant you become on the error correction scheme, which also has to compensate for problems at the dye layer, age-related degradation, and typical read errors. Once its limitations are exceeded, then you start getting bad blocks. -
bit_user Reply
I would use M-discs for backups, but they're too expensive and hard to find. I already have plenty of BD-R discs, as well.USAFRet said:If people thought there is a viable use, they would use them. -
bit_user Reply
Who used 1x? The photo in the article showed 4x. The best entrant was a 2x disc.Notton said:If you are ever wondering why DVD RW discs were never popular...
1x write speed = 1hr
BTW, I always try to burn my optical discs at a speed below the maximum supported, just to leave a bit more margin. That should mean burning with lower jitter and either more energy-density or at least should reduce stress on the burner.
That said, I never used 2x discs. For me, it was always like burning a 6x disc at 4x. -
Co BIY For an archive I am more concerned about the data life on the disc. How many years can we expect the data to remain readable on the disk in normal storage ?Reply
Very few people even consider the value of an archive - let alone invest in it.