-
Hello,
Siglent SDS1202X-E or Rigol DS1202Z-E
https://siglent.co.uk/product/siglent-sds1202x-e-super-phosphor-oscilloscope/
https://www.rigol-uk.co.uk/product/rigol-ds1202z-e-2ch-200mhz-1gsa-s-digital-oscilloscope/
UK Price about the same, specs look similar so wondering any users comment out there and which one take pole position please?
imk -
For 30 quid difference? Get the Siglent.
-
For a little bit more the 4ch SDS1104X-U might also be worth considering.
-
I'm still mainly interested in the Rigol vs Siglent 2-channel scopes, but you have to keep an open mind too. at the moment it's not clear which way to go. Finding informative opinions must be the way to resolve this dilemma...
It's clear that the Siglent is better, but .... it's also more expensive.
It all comes down to price difference where you live. If the Siglent is more than 40% more (approx) than the Rigol then you need a very definite reason to buy the Siglent. In general use the Rigol is a very capable 'scope for the money.
-
A friend recently bought the DS1202Z-E and it's very impressive for it's cost, though the price difference between the SDS1202X-E and the DS1202Z-E is pocket money, so the obvious choice is the SDS1202X-E imho if you only want 2 channels.
However I'm going for the SDS1104X-E, as it has 4 channels and dual ADC's (And has the option of adding a AWG and MSO later on) -
A friend recently bought the DS1202Z-E and it's very impressive for it's cost, though the price difference between the SDS1202X-E and the DS1202Z-E is pocket money, so the obvious choice is the SDS1202X-E imho if you only want 2 channels.
IME these options are rarely taken later by customers due to their additional cost but initially like the idea but after time with a 4ch DSO prove to themselves the need for it is rare.
However I'm going for the SDS1104X-E, as it has 4 channels and dual ADC's (And has the option of adding a AWG and MSO later on)
Those without a need for raw BW are quite well served by the good bit cheaper SDS1104X-U. -
Yes agreed, but the option is always there if needed.
I am genuinely interested in the AWG option, especially as it is isolated. But I cannot find much information about it and real world use.A friend recently bought the DS1202Z-E and it's very impressive for it's cost, though the price difference between the SDS1202X-E and the DS1202Z-E is pocket money, so the obvious choice is the SDS1202X-E imho if you only want 2 channels.
IME these options are rarely taken later by customers due to their additional cost but initially like the idea but after time with a 4ch DSO prove to themselves the need for it is rare.
However I'm going for the SDS1104X-E, as it has 4 channels and dual ADC's (And has the option of adding a AWG and MSO later on)
Those without a need for raw BW are quite well served by the good bit cheaper SDS1104X-U. -
I am genuinely interested in the AWG option, especially as it is isolated. But I cannot find much information about it and real world use.
I can get one out and test some things should you like....wet days perfect for this are nearly here.
Dream up some challenges.
The section on how to use SAG1021I is P185 in the manual:
https://int.siglent.com/u_file/document/SDS1000XE&SDS1000XU_UserManual_UM0101E-E05A.pdf
The best overview of SAG1021I specs is here:
https://siglentna.com/product/external-arbitrary-waveform-generator-2/
Maybe you should start a SAG1021I thread to keep it altogether should others like to contribute. -
I am genuinely interested in the AWG option, especially as it is isolated. But I cannot find much information about it and real world use.
I can get one out and test some things should you like....wet days perfect for this are nearly here.
Dream up some challenges.
The section on how to use SAG1021I is P185 in the manual:
https://int.siglent.com/u_file/document/SDS1000XE&SDS1000XU_UserManual_UM0101E-E05A.pdf
The best overview of SAG1021I specs is here:
https://siglentna.com/product/external-arbitrary-waveform-generator-2/
Maybe you should start a SAG1021I thread to keep it altogether should others like to contribute.
This is not about SAG1021i but about SAG1021. I think it is still very good review to read, made by Performa01 (there is, in reply #48 and #49 total four pdf (pages 1 - 46)
Possible i model and today FW may affect some but imho all main basics are there ok and very well done as normal from Performa01.
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/siglent-sds1104x-e-in-depth-review/msg1432665/#msg1432665 -
The best overview of SAG1021I specs is here:
I'd need to buy a SAG1021I AND a licence for the 'scope?
-
A friend recently bought the DS1202Z-E and it's very impressive for it's cost, though the price difference between the SDS1202X-E and the DS1202Z-E is pocket money, so the obvious choice is the SDS1202X-E imho if you only want 2 channels.
IME these options are rarely taken later by customers due to their additional cost but initially like the idea but after time with a 4ch DSO prove to themselves the need for it is rare.
However I'm going for the SDS1104X-E, as it has 4 channels and dual ADC's (And has the option of adding a AWG and MSO later on)
Those without a need for raw BW are quite well served by the good bit cheaper SDS1104X-U.
I was looking at the MSO option but I have also come to the conclusion that a 4ch DSO has some advantages over the MSO:
1. Checking signals on an i2c or spi bus "looks about right", then analog scope can confirm levels are OK;
2. Extra channels from the MSO make the display more than a bit crowded;
3. Looking at a serial bus vs a 16-bit bus is as well served by 4 channel as 16;
4. Highly integrated chips don't generally hook up with a parallel bus - 4 channel is more than adequate.
Rigol 4 channel 100MHz scope is slightly more expensive (£25) than the Siglent but the cost of adding the MSO is much cheaper (£180) and as well as the H/W there is no license required. The Rigol has 1 gs/s, 500 M/s and 250 M/s for 1, 2 or 4 channel so is closer to the -U version of Siglent. I'm not sure how they get to over 100Mhz with 4 channels running with only 2.5 or fewer samples - seems like guesswork. It has been commented before that sometimes paying a small premium for Siglent is justified.
Rigol vs Siglent also comes down to preference of the user interface. I do like the side buttons on the Rigol and the selection of measurements, but also the soft buttons underneath on the Siglent. Both scopes seem to have crowded the screen on the LHS and RHS so that the waveforms are smaller than they need to be and (as I read it) no option to hide the soft menus? The two-channel Rigol has combined the vertical V/div control with a 2 button selection whereas the Siglent stays with two separate controls. When you see the Rigol power-up, you immediately see green lights under the blanked-off areas suggesting it takes advantage of a common circuit board and an overlay that restricts the design.
There is a real danger that I may overthink the purchase and get more than what I need. That said I feel more comfortable with the Siglent 4 channel SDS1104X-E over the SDS1104X-U. In the US they aim for a $100 reduction but in the UK there is only a £50 premium. A scope is one of those things, where trying to economize now, can easily backfire later. When considering the price, where you buy it in the UK affects the total price (discount and delivery) so that has to be factored in too.
Simon -
Where have you been looking at the Siglent models and what discounts are available? As I'm also in the UK and have only looked at one reseller which is Telonic (Who is also Siglent and Rigol UK).
A friend recently bought the DS1202Z-E and it's very impressive for it's cost, though the price difference between the SDS1202X-E and the DS1202Z-E is pocket money, so the obvious choice is the SDS1202X-E imho if you only want 2 channels.
IME these options are rarely taken later by customers due to their additional cost but initially like the idea but after time with a 4ch DSO prove to themselves the need for it is rare.
However I'm going for the SDS1104X-E, as it has 4 channels and dual ADC's (And has the option of adding a AWG and MSO later on)
Those without a need for raw BW are quite well served by the good bit cheaper SDS1104X-U.
I was looking at the MSO option but I have also come to the conclusion that a 4ch DSO has some advantages over the MSO:
1. Checking signals on an i2c or spi bus "looks about right", then analog scope can confirm levels are OK;
2. Extra channels from the MSO make the display more than a bit crowded;
3. Looking at a serial bus vs a 16-bit bus is as well served by 4 channel as 16;
4. Highly integrated chips don't generally hook up with a parallel bus - 4 channel is more than adequate.
Rigol 4 channel 100MHz scope is slightly more expensive (£25) than the Siglent but the cost of adding the MSO is much cheaper (£180) and as well as the H/W there is no license required. The Rigol has 1 gs/s, 500 M/s and 250 M/s for 1, 2 or 4 channel so is closer to the -U version of Siglent. I'm not sure how they get to over 100Mhz with 4 channels running with only 2.5 or fewer samples - seems like guesswork. It has been commented before that sometimes paying a small premium for Siglent is justified.
Rigol vs Siglent also comes down to preference of the user interface. I do like the side buttons on the Rigol and the selection of measurements, but also the soft buttons underneath on the Siglent. Both scopes seem to have crowded the screen on the LHS and RHS so that the waveforms are smaller than they need to be and (as I read it) no option to hide the soft menus? The two-channel Rigol has combined the vertical V/div control with a 2 button selection whereas the Siglent stays with two separate controls. When you see the Rigol power-up, you immediately see green lights under the blanked-off areas suggesting it takes advantage of a common circuit board and an overlay that restricts the design.
There is a real danger that I may overthink the purchase and get more than what I need. That said I feel more comfortable with the Siglent 4 channel SDS1104X-E over the SDS1104X-U. In the US they aim for a $100 reduction but in the UK there is only a £50 premium. A scope is one of those things, where trying to economize now, can easily backfire later. When considering the price, where you buy it in the UK affects the total price (discount and delivery) so that has to be factored in too.
Simon -
Yes unless you liberate it.The best overview of SAG1021I specs is here:
I'd need to buy a SAG1021I AND a licence for the 'scope?
At such little difference in the UK between X-U and X-E the X-E is a no brainer.A friend recently bought the DS1202Z-E and it's very impressive for it's cost, though the price difference between the SDS1202X-E and the DS1202Z-E is pocket money, so the obvious choice is the SDS1202X-E imho if you only want 2 channels.
IME these options are rarely taken later by customers due to their additional cost but initially like the idea but after time with a 4ch DSO prove to themselves the need for it is rare.
However I'm going for the SDS1104X-E, as it has 4 channels and dual ADC's (And has the option of adding a AWG and MSO later on)
Those without a need for raw BW are quite well served by the good bit cheaper SDS1104X-U.
I was looking at the MSO option but I have also come to the conclusion that a 4ch DSO has some advantages over the MSO:
1. Checking signals on an i2c or spi bus "looks about right", then analog scope can confirm levels are OK;
2. Extra channels from the MSO make the display more than a bit crowded;
3. Looking at a serial bus vs a 16-bit bus is as well served by 4 channel as 16;
4. Highly integrated chips don't generally hook up with a parallel bus - 4 channel is more than adequate.
Rigol 4 channel 100MHz scope is slightly more expensive (£25) than the Siglent but the cost of adding the MSO is much cheaper (£180) and as well as the H/W there is no license required. The Rigol has 1 gs/s, 500 M/s and 250 M/s for 1, 2 or 4 channel so is closer to the -U version of Siglent. I'm not sure how they get to over 100Mhz with 4 channels running with only 2.5 or fewer samples - seems like guesswork. It has been commented before that sometimes paying a small premium for Siglent is justified.
Rigol vs Siglent also comes down to preference of the user interface. I do like the side buttons on the Rigol and the selection of measurements, but also the soft buttons underneath on the Siglent. Both scopes seem to have crowded the screen on the LHS and RHS so that the waveforms are smaller than they need to be and (as I read it) no option to hide the soft menus? The two-channel Rigol has combined the vertical V/div control with a 2 button selection whereas the Siglent stays with two separate controls. When you see the Rigol power-up, you immediately see green lights under the blanked-off areas suggesting it takes advantage of a common circuit board and an overlay that restricts the design.
There is a real danger that I may overthink the purchase and get more than what I need. That said I feel more comfortable with the Siglent 4 channel SDS1104X-E over the SDS1104X-U. In the US they aim for a $100 reduction but in the UK there is only a £50 premium. A scope is one of those things, where trying to economize now, can easily backfire later. When considering the price, where you buy it in the UK affects the total price (discount and delivery) so that has to be factored in too.
Simon
On both models bottom left of the display is a small round white button that toggles the menus ON and OFF.
Quite convenient when the display gets really busy as Decode lines drop into the vacated space. -
The best overview of SAG1021I specs is here:
I'd need to buy a SAG1021I AND a licence for the 'scope?
The price of the SAG1021I is high enough that it's just not worth it. It's currently $159 at Saelig, but the UNI-T UTG962 $152 from Amazon, is a 60 MHz generator (even though I'm skeptical it hits that target, it's actual capability is almost certainly more than the 25 MHz of the SAG1021I), and has two channels whilst the SAG1021I has only one. It's not clear whether it's controllable from the SDS-1104X-E for the purpose of doing Bode plots, though.
The FY6900 is even less expensive (about $130 on Amazon) for 60 MHz, and is apparently also controllable from the SDS1104X-E. See https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/siglent-sds1104x-e-and-sds1204x-e-bode-plot-with-non-siglent-awg/?all
Fortunately, nothing says you have to buy the AWG immediately.
-
It's not clear whether it's controllable from the SDS-1104X-E for the purpose of doing Bode plots, though.The best overview of SAG1021I specs is here:
I'd need to buy a SAG1021I AND a licence for the 'scope?
It clearly isn't controllable directly. That thread with using FY6900 with Siglent scope uses PC in a loop, and a piece of software.
Which is great if you happen to already have them both, and you just want the functionality and you don't mind additional effort and equipment being used.
Beauty of the Siglent scope + Siglent AWG (not only SAG, but also SDG1000X, 2000X, 6000X) is transparent work in FRA.
It simply works. Just connect network or USB.
How important is that to anybody, it's their choice.
Some people might decide they don't need the FRA at all and that even a simple analog function generator is enough for them... -
If you totally overlook the fact that it has an isolated output with a ±42 Vpk isolation rating.The best overview of SAG1021I specs is here:
I'd need to buy a SAG1021I AND a licence for the 'scope?
The price of the SAG1021I is high enough that it's just not worth it.
Please do show us a similar device for similar cost. -
Hi,
regarding handling of the scopes .... only the 4-channel X-E types feature the integrated webserver.
I returned a 1202x-E and got a 1104X-E instead due to missing this feature.
A feature I haven't seen any talk about is the preset key which allows to put the scope into a user-configured preset condition or a factory default. Quite useful in education or certain production processes.
regards
Calvin -
It's not clear whether it's controllable from the SDS-1104X-E for the purpose of doing Bode plots, though.The best overview of SAG1021I specs is here:
I'd need to buy a SAG1021I AND a licence for the 'scope?
It clearly isn't controllable directly. That thread with using FY6900 with Siglent scope uses PC in a loop, and a piece of software.
Which is great if you happen to already have them both, and you just want the functionality and you don't mind additional effort and equipment being used.
Beauty of the Siglent scope + Siglent AWG (not only SAG, but also SDG1000X, 2000X, 6000X) is transparent work in FRA.
It simply works. Just connect network or USB.
How important is that to anybody, it's their choice.
Some people might decide they don't need the FRA at all and that even a simple analog function generator is enough for them...
Indeed very true, the Siglent approach is seamless and just works!! The built-in Bode capability has proven very useful in our work (as has the nice FFT feature).
Best, -
This has been suggested to me https://www.sjelectronics.co.uk/brands/gw-instek/gw-instek-gds-1054b-digital-storage-oscilloscope.html
I can't honestly say I like how it looks, but the spec is OK for the price. -
On both models bottom left of the display is a small round white button that toggles the menus ON and OFF.
Excellent feature. Why have a compromised waveform? So far as I can see, Rigol has soft menus on both LH and RH side without the option to hide them. Menu on/off on Siglent removes menus on the bottom or also on the RHS?
Simon -
Only the bottom menus can be hidden as they don't show the more important RHS operational settings while the bottom settings show far less important info unless you're documenting screenshots or coming here seeking help where the more settings you can show is more helpful for us to give guidance.On both models bottom left of the display is a small round white button that toggles the menus ON and OFF.
Excellent feature. Why have a compromised waveform? So far as I can see, Rigol has soft menus on both LH and RH side without the option to hide them. Menu on/off on Siglent removes menus on the bottom or also on the RHS?
Simonregarding handling of the scopes .... only the 4-channel X-E types feature the integrated webserver.
Yes this is a trap for some as SDS1202X-E was released before Siglent included webservers in this class of instrument however the 2ch 2 GSa/s 200 & 350 MHz SDS2000X-E series does have a webserver and the Bode plot feature.
I returned a 1202x-E and got a 1104X-E instead due to missing this feature.QuoteA feature I haven't seen any talk about is the preset key which allows to put the scope into a user-configured preset condition or a factory default. Quite useful in education or certain production processes.
Yes we have discussed User Default at length in the SDS1104X-E thread and in various SDS1202X-E threads and it's a feature Siglent use in all their recent release DSO's.
It's in the Save/Recall menu and the last item in the Save menu.
I would recommend when using it to do a Factory Default before making any preferred settings prior to setting the User Default. I use it frequently to set my preferred scope settings for instant recall with the Default key.
-
It clearly isn't controllable directly.
Hrm, that's disappointing. Not surprising, but disappointing.QuoteThat thread with using FY6900 with Siglent scope uses PC in a loop, and a piece of software.
Which is great if you happen to already have them both, and you just want the functionality and you don't mind additional effort and equipment being used.
That's most certainly true. Though you might be able to use a Raspberry Pi as the "PC". I've no idea. I've never tried to use it.QuoteBeauty of the Siglent scope + Siglent AWG (not only SAG, but also SDG1000X, 2000X, 6000X) is transparent work in FRA.
It simply works. Just connect network or USB.
That is most certainly true as well. Keep in mind that if you're willing to pay about $100 more, then you can get a standalone Siglent unit (the SDG830). It, too, is a single-channel unit. An additional $160 over the SAG1021I gets you the SDG1032X, which has two channels.
Frankly, I'd spend the extra money up-front and go for a standalone solution like the SDG1032X. Not only will it be more capable, it'll be more flexible and it is not dependent upon a single scope make/model for its operation. It'll be useful to you even if you decide to move on to some other scope later on.QuoteHow important is that to anybody, it's their choice.
Some people might decide they don't need the FRA at all and that even a simple analog function generator is enough for them...
Yep. There are a number of options here, each with its own set of tradeoffs. If you don't need the FRA then the options open up enormously.
-
This has been suggested to me https://www.sjelectronics.co.uk/brands/gw-instek/gw-instek-gds-1054b-digital-storage-oscilloscope.html
I can't honestly say I like how it looks, but the spec is OK for the price.
Yep. It's a very nice little 'scope. Low noise, very fast/responsive, separate controls for each channel... and a proper button to push for the menu selections instead of trying to push a twisty knob.
Here's the hacking thread: https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/possible-gw-instek-gds-1000b-hack/
(nb. all the serial decoders, etc., are included as standard these days but you can hack the bandwidth)
-
Only the bottom menus can be hidden as they don't show the more important RHS operational settings while the bottom settings show far less important info unless you're documenting screenshots or coming here seeking help where the more settings you can show is more helpful for us to give guidance.
I have the spec sheet and the manual for X-E and X-U and for the small increase in price the X-E is a no-brainer (US is about $100 difference and here in the UK it's £50). The manual shows the menu on/off but the operation isn't described. It makes perfect sense that it turns the menu at the bottom on/off and it's close to that area too.
I couldn't find anything to suggest that the X-U has less capable processing capability (it would have been nice to know that they didn't save a few cents on this) - I get it that the input is simplified and doesn't have a second sampling chip. At this price point sampling with two chips is cool. So pretty much sold on the idea of an X-E. I can see that the X-U will be an option if the budget was for 2 channels because it's a small increase to go to 4-channels.
I get that there is a hack for setting it at 200MHz BW, perhaps there are downsides to doing that? I read that the supplied probes rated at 100MHz are actually quite good ones, so no need to rush to replace them even with the hack (I was nervous about doing it but if it's reversible, why not?).
Simon -
I get that there is a hack for setting it at 200MHz BW, perhaps there are downsides to doing that? I read that the supplied probes rated at 100MHz are actually quite good ones, so no need to rush to replace them even with the hack
There is no downside to the hack and you get more than bandwidth--USB WiFi for one. There's also MSO (if you buy the adapter) and external AWG (if you buy one) but those options aren't too exciting. The included probes have excellent bandwidth, but I wouldn't call them 'good'. They're cheap-ish and not very durable, so I'd say they're 'OK'. Not that I am complaining--at the price of the scope they really can't include $200 worth of probes. You'll want to scour eBay for your own specific probes anyway--switchable 1X/10X probes are sort of amateur hour anyway.