No Script, No Fear, All Opinion
RSS icon Home icon
  • EEVblog #187 – Tektronix TDS2024C Oscilloscope Teardown

    Posted on July 21st, 2011 EEVblog 24 comments


    Dave tears down the Tektronix TDS2000 series TDS2024C DSO, what’s inside?
    And he can’t help but rant about the sample memory size and compare it to the venerable TDS210 from 1997 or so…

    Be Sociable, Share!
     

    24 responses to “EEVblog #187 – Tektronix TDS2024C Oscilloscope Teardown” RSS icon

    • I must say I disagree with you on the looks of the scope as I quite like it and think it has been laid out very clearly.

      I, for one, do not want my test equipment to look like some gaudy bratz doll.

      Having the timebase on the same line as the channel sensitivity knobs is just fine with me as that’s where I’d expect to find the timebase.

      I agree that the shielding and the terrible boot time is not quite what I’d expect from Tektronix, though.

    • Ronnie Yujuico

      Maybe the only good things about the TDS210 and TDS2000 series are their build quality and reliability? If Dave’s TDS210 is still working fine after 14 years, for me it is worth the investment.

    • Abdullah Kahraman

      I cannot see any difference between 1080p and 720p, and I think it is a little foggy or blurry?

      • The video quality is really great, but the difference between 720p and 1080p appears to be minuscule to me as well.
        Also having issues with my bandwidth here recently, so no 1080p for me anyways.

      • Yeah, I have to experiment with this more. I used to shoot and upload in 1280x720p (9Mbps capture, 5Mbps upload) but with new camera I now shoot and upload 1440x1080p (12Mbps capture, 6-8Mbps upload).
        I might be better off rendering to 1280×720 and uploading that at a higher bit rate for better quality?

    • A bit of a silly question here but it’s been bothering the crap out of me for a while. Does Dave have someone else write the posts on the site for him or does he speak of himself in the third person?

      • I don’t quite have the money to hire someone to write my posts for me :->
        So yes, it’s me, and yes, I write in the third person. I don’t know why, I just think it’s fun.

    • I am a real person

    • Robert, this is the correct style of writing. Dave refers to himself in third person , because if the post is taken out of context (for example a RSS reader), then we still know who is writing (as opposed to just “I” / “me”).

    • I actually am a transistor-based robot.

    • Thank you for this video! I calibrate these series of o’scopes, as well as many 2246s, etc, and enjoyed your video immensely.

    • Yesterday I bought (rapted by your excellent presentation on your # 37 and # 70 v-post) the Rigol DS1052E from ebay. Today when I saw the title of your new post I was kind of crossing my fingers hoping that I had made the right choise and that Tektronix hadn’t spoiled it for me by producing a better competitor… I feel relieved I guess! :-)

    • I always thought TDS ment TeDiouS.

      The TDS series is the service workhorse of the Tek series and the guy to beat for all low end Eastern companies.

      Now the TPS series is much more appreciated for its 4 floating inputs. I wonder why Tektronix never upgraded the TPS series.

    • Dave what are you doing at 12:53??? Children may see it and do the same in future ;->

    • Wohoo, Dave’s using an ESD strap!

      FWIW, I liked the older intro with drawing better than the fading one.

    • I’m actually not at all surprised to see display to have its own controller board. Most likely the display is an off-the-shelf-part or done by outside contractor, and thus has its own custom driver board.
      Driver board having expensive FPGA and not ASIC pretty strongly hints towards latter — or maybe it was done by display manufacturer by special order from tek.

    • rackandboneman

      The TI device looks like a plain 74AC16244, 16 bit version of the bog standard 74AC244 tristate buffer….

    • Hi Dave..

      Excellent review.. very good hints and points to take in account..

      Have you ever consider doing a review on the Fluke 199C portable scope???

      I would be great to hear and see you reviewing this scope…

      (one follower form Venezuela)

    • The original 2.5k-Samples limitation of the original TDS series some 13 years ago came from using an analogue CCD for sample storage.

      Do the recent TDS models still rely on CCDs for sample storage or do they finally store the digital representation of the signal?

    • Yup, early DSO’s used ccd devices, they were clock-in-fast then clock-out-slow to a slow ADC, but always short memory and noisy – it was all they had at the time. Modern DSO’s have have solved this now, but there is no single sram fast enough to take sample words at 1 nanosecond intervals. 1 nanosecond is a miniscule bit of time, light travels just 30cm in that time!! Because PC marketers persist in blatant lies like 3GHz clock rates, people think 1 nanosecond is easy – it isn’t. It’s weird but Tek have no data compression algorithm to properly show memory on a small pixel screen, so screen alias occurs a lot. Most cheap DSO’s copy this method of data decimation to display, so most are badly compromised designs. Whoever got fired for copying Tek?

    Leave a reply