Best 350MHz scope in a hackable world (Siglent SDS2104X Plus or Rigol MSO5072)

[TurboTom]

U/I and history / memory management aside, I'm somewhat surprised of the sample rate / input bandwidth of both scopes:

Siglent uses 2*2GSa/s ADCs (probably off-the-shelf MXT2001 or equivalent), providing insufficient power for the 500MHz specified bandwidth on all channels of the top-of-the-line version. I didn't read all of the SDS2000X+ thread hence I don't know if it had been confirmed that in four-channel mode, the instrument enables a properly designed anti-aliasing filter at its inputs to avoid producing mirror frequency signals.

On the other hand, Rigol's (probably proprietary) ADC on the MSO5000 has more than enough grunt to run all channels at 2GSa/s which doesn't appear to be really necessary on a 350MHz instrument -- remember, the DS2000(A) ran on one MXT2001 ADC just well to provide a (measured) -3dB point of approx. 360MHz on both its channels. So it seems, here the ADC is way over the top, instead the input circuitry is lacking a 50 ohm mode which is a shame considering the possible performace otherwise.

Put Rigol's ADC into Siglent's scope and add some history/sample memory processing of both and you've probably got a "screamer"... 

[tautech]

U/I and history / memory management aside, I'm somewhat surprised of the sample rate / input bandwidth of both scopes:

Siglent uses 2*2GSa/s ADCs (probably off-the-shelf MXT2001 or equivalent), providing insufficient power for the 500MHz specified bandwidth on all channels of the top-of-the-line version. I didn't read all of the SDS2000X+ thread hence I don't know if it had been confirmed that in four-channel mode, the instrument enables a properly designed anti-aliasing filter at its inputs to avoid producing mirror frequency signals.

From the datasheet:
* 1：In interleaving mode bandwidth is 500 MHz, rise time is 0.8 ns; in non-interleaving mode bandwidth is 350 MHz, rise time is 1 ns

[TurboTom]

This makes sense, yet I'ld be quite curious to know if adaptive anti-aliasing filtering is used...

[jemangedeslolos]

One thing that I don't understand is that we can find 10inch full HD touch screens for nothing today.
Why are oscilloscope manufacturers limited to such low resolutions ?

More pixels the more processing power / time you need to fill those pixels.. more cost.. whats the trade off gain? questionable for a budget scope

Still think at least the 2k+ line should have had an hdmi port... the web interface is nice but the refresh rate is bleh

I almost agree with you but I don't have enough knowledge in oscilloscope architecture.
I don't know what is the screen refresh rate, but I doubt that today it is a problem to refresh a screen at 50Hz in full HD resolution.

A better resolution makes it possible to display more things on the screen with better defined characters.
We are all used to using smartphones with 5-6 inch screens in 4K res so going back with a low resolution on a 10 inch screen is not that great.

That said I understand very well that on a 1000€ oscilloscope this is not possible so I deviate from the initial subject, but on an MSO7000 or SDS5000X, they could have made an effort.

[tautech]

This makes sense, yet I'ld be quite curious to know if adaptive anti-aliasing filtering is used...

IDK however the first 2 pages in the SDS2kX Plus thread have some good posts from Performa01 that you should study more.

[jemangedeslolos]

U/I and history / memory management aside, I'm somewhat surprised of the sample rate / input bandwidth of both scopes:

Siglent uses 2*2GSa/s ADCs (probably off-the-shelf MXT2001 or equivalent), providing insufficient power for the 500MHz specified bandwidth on all channels of the top-of-the-line version. I didn't read all of the SDS2000X+ thread hence I don't know if it had been confirmed that in four-channel mode, the instrument enables a properly designed anti-aliasing filter at its inputs to avoid producing mirror frequency signals.

On the other hand, Rigol's (probably proprietary) ADC on the MSO5000 has more than enough grunt to run all channels at 2GSa/s which doesn't appear to be really necessary on a 350MHz instrument -- remember, the DS2000(A) ran on one MXT2001 ADC just well to provide a (measured) -3dB point of approx. 360MHz on both its channels. So it seems, here the ADC is way over the top, instead the input circuitry is lacking a 50 ohm mode which is a shame considering the possible performace otherwise.

Put Rigol's ADC into Siglent's scope and add some history/sample memory processing of both and you've probably got a "screamer"... 

I think that is a ADC08D1000 for the SDS2000X and SDS2000X Plus but Im not sure.

[tv84]

I don't know what is the screen refresh rate, but I doubt that today it is a problem to refresh a screen at 50Hz in full HD resolution.

A better resolution makes it possible to display more things on the screen with better defined characters.
We are all used to using smartphones with 5-6 inch screens in 4K res so going back with a low resolution on a 10 inch screen is not that great.

Do you prefer fancy graphics or better responsiveness and adherence to the real signal being analysed? 

That's the trade-off.  As usual, there are pricier machines that have both.

[jemangedeslolos]

I don't know what is the screen refresh rate, but I doubt that today it is a problem to refresh a screen at 50Hz in full HD resolution.

A better resolution makes it possible to display more things on the screen with better defined characters.
We are all used to using smartphones with 5-6 inch screens in 4K res so going back with a low resolution on a 10 inch screen is not that great.

Do you prefer fancy graphics or better responsiveness and adherence to the real signal being analysed? 

That's the trade-off.  As usual, there are pricier machines that have both.

fancy graphics no, but more information on screen with more defined characters yes. With a 12 or 15inch screen, 20 GS/s, gesture control, no fans and 2000€ all included and free shipping.
Not that complicated 

Without jocking I say that because I am a little envious of the R&S UI

[TurboTom]

I think that is a ADC08D1000 for the SDS2000X and SDS2000X Plus but Im not sure.

AFAIK the MXT2001 is basically a chinese clone of the ADC08D1000 series of ADCs.

[tggzzz]

Do you prefer fancy graphics or better responsiveness and adherence to the real signal being analysed? 

That's the trade-off.  As usual, there are pricier machines that have both.

Another tradeoff: a real 50ohm input or an imitation 50ohm//20pF input?

Who cares what happens inside a scope if the signal reaching it is distorted by the probe and/or cable and/or input!

A scope without a probe (or 50ohm cable) is only half of the measurement tool.

[jemangedeslolos]

I think that is a ADC08D1000 for the SDS2000X and SDS2000X Plus but Im not sure.

AFAIK the MXT2001 is basically a chinese clone of the ADC08D1000 series of ADCs.

Thank you, I didn't know that.

[noreply]

Been following with attention this thread and I'm still    as to what device is best for my immediate needs.

What I like about the Rigol so far;-

1. 350Mhz probes included - lets face it having 500MHz on Siglent without appropriate probes is pointless - so additional $$ required
2. HDMI - helps with 'dim & reflective screen' when working in your 'lab'
3. Dual AWG - despite lower BW - very handy

What I don't like ;-

1. Looks 'cheap' with black plastic finish
2. Screen is 'gloss' and poor brightness and < 10"    (yes I know can use HDMI as stated above - but not in the field)
3. 'Upgradability' not as elegant as Siglent's - just entering appropriate license keys 


Before I move to the 'dark side' (pun intended  ) - I'm curious as to the capability of logic analysis on both devices - the Rigol & the Siglent?

Nobody jas made a detailed comparison as yet - I welcome your input(s) 

Is there a 'clear' winner in capability, user interface and general 'usability' that is noteworthy - or are they much the same 

[TurboTom]

I think that is a ADC08D1000 for the SDS2000X and SDS2000X Plus but Im not sure.

AFAIK the MXT2001 is basically a chinese clone of the ADC08D1000 series of ADCs.

Thank you, I didn't know that.

A little off-topic, but nonetheless a very interesting read: @jjoonathan's write-up of his DS4000 fix, replacing two of Rigol's (supposedly) MXT2001 with ADC08D1000s.

[pascal_sweden]

It would indeed be nice for a review that compares both devices by performing some actual tests using real world scenarios.

Not just turn some buttons and complain about the UI, but perform some actual tests using real world scenarios.

Make active use of the Logic Analyzer.
Check the protocol decoding.
Capture a hard to find glitch.
Check if the waveform update rates are similar.
Check the usefulness of the spectrum analyzer.
Save waveforms to an Excell sheet.
Check how easy it is to configure the signal generators.
Perform a bode plot and check the speed and accuracy.

[noreply]

It would indeed be nice for a review that compares both devices by performing some actual tests using real world scenarios.

Not just turn some buttons and complain about the UI, but perform some actual tests using real world scenarios.

Make active use of the Logic Analyzer.
Check the protocol decoding.
Capture a hard to find glitch.
Check if the waveform update rates are similar.
Check the usefulness of the spectrum analyzer.
Save waveforms to an Excell sheet.
Check how easy it is to configure the signal generators.
Perform a bode plot and check the speed and accuracy.

 

Sure would be nice to have a side by side review

- not sure if Dave has done a real 'in-depth' side by side review

- other than the initial teardown and general 'fiddling' with the interface(s) for the respective devices 

[pascal_sweden]

A little off-topic, but nonetheless a very interesting read: @jjoonathan's write-up of his DS4000 fix, replacing two of Rigol's (supposedly) MXT2001 with ADC08D1000s.

I am impressed! Some people are really smart troubleshooters.

Smart and handy! Gifted talent. Respect!

[Fungus]

Sure would be nice to have a side by side review

- not sure if Dave has done a real 'in-depth' side by side review

- other than the initial teardown and general 'fiddling' with the interface(s) for the respective devices 

I think Dave said he's not going to do reviews like that because it's many days of work to do it properly. That's why he just does a teardown and quick fiddle with the basic features.

It won't help anyway, some people will always value a different color case or a better response in the vertical position control more than actual features. These people can be just as vocal as the people with real usage evidence.

[pascal_sweden]

Batronix in Europe sells both oscilloscopes.

Anybody from Batronix on this forum who is up for a detailed review?

[tv84]

A little off-topic, but nonetheless a very interesting read: @jjoonathan's write-up of his DS4000 fix, replacing two of Rigol's (supposedly) MXT2001 with ADC08D1000s.

Tom, thanks for the link. Awesome stuff! Absolute respect for Jonathan's work! 

[Martin72]

(I had promised myself that I wouldn't participate but... I'll repeat myself...)

The only difference is price! If you have $1500 buy the Siglent. If you only have $1000 buy the Rigol 5074.

I totally agree to this and I got them both, first the rigol for over a year.
Then sold for the siglent and until now never regret it.
Bigger, clearer screen, better touchscreen responsive, less lag between touching and acitvating an element than on rigol, looks "adulter" in general (no "mickey mouse" design).
Menu structure much more better, eres and 10 bit resolution, noiseless frontend, better than rigol (remind dave´s comment to this in his "review" of the mso 5000).
50 ohm inputs ( which is better than using a external termination), external trigger input...
But that´s what you expect, when you paying more.

The rigol could not get all it´s "horsepower" to the wheels, 8GSa/s are outstanding in it´s class( and not only there), also 200mpt Memory, 9" display, 2-ch inbuilt awg, lots of math functions including digital filters, 4 math channels (siglent got 2) simultaneously displaying, excellent waveform update rate and so on....excellent bang for bucks ratio.

I guess, rigol want to make it possible, to sell their own asic as cheap as possible and this is the result.
In pros but also in cons, which are :

-Display is somekind of dim( after modification it´s getting better, but in comparision to the siglent there´s still a difference), weak angle view, touchpanel is laggy and not so precise as on the siglent.
-Small fan, in the first edition inacceptable noisy, after the update less noise but scope is heating more up.
-Case look and feel cheaper, the design of the front are toy-style.
(BTW, it makes no difference to me, if a scope got separate or common vertical channel controls)
-No external trigger input, no autosense inputs ( I didn´t miss them).
-Math: You got more displaying channels, but all got the same trace colour...
-Weak support in case of firmware updates.

But...
For 1000 bucks it couldn´t get any better than buying this raw diamond, still I like it.
When spending appx 25...30% more, you get the siglent sds2k+.
If some things will be fixed/upgraded, this could be the scope for life for a hobbyist.
At least we´re talking about 1000...1400 bucks in both cases, which will be probaly the maximum range for most of the hobbyists.

[Elasia]

noreply

This is usually what I do... contact whoever your favorite distributor is and flat out tell them you are interested in both scopes and want to see them side by side for a couple of weeks and plan to return the other

Most of the time they are kosher with it or might even just send you some demo units for you to try and send back

If that fails, i will buy both items maybe from them or a competitor that's close on price but dont deal with, give both a good gander then return one

I'm not going to do a logic probe write up but its been pretty good using it and even more fantastic i know how to timebase shift now and zoom out lol

[noreply]

(I had promised myself that I wouldn't participate but... I'll repeat myself...)

The only difference is price! If you have $1500 buy the Siglent. If you only have $1000 buy the Rigol 5074.

I totally agree to this and I got them both, first the rigol for over a year.
Then sold for the siglent and until now never regret it.

...
...
...

But...
For 1000 bucks it couldn´t get any better than buying this raw diamond, still I like it.
When spending appx 25...30% more, you get the siglent sds2k+.
If some things will be fixed/upgraded, this could be the scope for life for a hobbyist.
At least we´re talking about 1000...1400 bucks in both cases, which will be probaly the maximum range for most of the hobbyists.

Martin ...

Thanks for a very insightful post

- I share your passion in the observations and comments
- without even owing either of the devices at the moment 

[noreply]

noreply

... contact whoever your favorite distributor is and flat out tell them you are interested in both scopes

Already in progress ... will report next week 

[pascal_sweden]

Look forward to the side by side review!

[willd1971]

Hi everyone - SDS2104X Plus is currently in stock at Labtronix in the UK.  www.labtronix.co.uk