Products > Test Equipment
Functional comparison of R&S RTB2000, Siglent SDS2000X and Keysight DSOX1000
RBBVNL9:
--- Quote ---An error with the 10Bit mode. SDS2000X+ is limited to 100MHz in 10Bit mode. Not 10MHz or 20Mhz.
--- End quote ---
Yes, correct. I added an erratum. Recording videos without mistakes is much harder than writing documents of forum posts :-| The overview document was correct on this, fortunately.
RBBVNL9:
--- Quote ---v40 - Page 8 - Acquisition system & memory
- Segmented memory depth
RTB2000 - 160Msample
should be: 320 Msample (e.g. 1 Channel, Record Length 10 MSa, No. of Segments 32)
--- End quote ---
Thanks! I was still planning to dig into memory in much more detail.
The Product Brochure | Version 06.00 mentions 160 Msample segmented memory, without further details. But the Data Sheet Version 15.00 indeed notes that memory is 320 Msample per channel in interleaved (i.e., 2 channel) mode.
So, somewhat surprisingly, the product brochure is underselling a bit ;-)
Will update!
nctnico:
When testing decoding (it looks like you are doing that), don't forget to test where the bitrate tops out at different memory lengths. You can find nasty surprises there.
kcbrown:
I have a request: when you're showing the UI of any given scope, can you show the screen itself, as opposed to the remote UI for it? I ask because the real responsiveness (good or bad) of the scope's UI isn't going to come through in the remote UI. This is especially true of the Keysight, where the remote UI looks very slow, but the in-person experience is very fast.
RBBVNL9:
--- Quote ---I have a request: when you're showing the UI of any given scope, can you show the screen itself, as opposed to the remote UI for it? I ask because the real responsiveness (good or bad) of the scope's UI isn't going to come through in the remote UI. This is especially true of the Keysight, where the remote UI looks very slow, but the in-person experience is very fast
--- End quote ---
Thanks for the feedback.
I understand your wish and originally had planned to do that. But shooting a comparison video with >2 devices using camera’s takes a lot of additional resources, which eventually would compete with the overall scope and the feasible timeline. (It’s already surprising how much one underestimates the time it takes to make such videos before actually starting..)
But what I will try is to have at least have some parts in from real cameras where speed matters. And yes, there we will probably see the Keysight is very fast in many ways indeed. It's a satisfying experience.
Also, note there are quite some different dimensions in the ‘perceived’ display speed of a device. There is the update of waveforms (e.g., when changing time base or vertical settings, there is possible sluggishness in the overall user interface, there are possible delays in specific more demanding functions. There is the update rate of real-time tables (measurements, serial decode) and (decode) diagrams. There is the catching of infrequent events (where both waveform update and screen-related aspects play a role). One could almost make a video on this alone (which I am not planning to do).
Also otherwise, there is a bewildering number of aspects on which these oscilloscopes differ (in the comparison document - which will soon be updated - I now distinguish over 600 in 40 pages). This can make it challenging to choose the one that fits your needs.
At the same time, it reflects how sophisticated these instruments have become. And by virtue of a rather significant market size, these devices are much more affordable than more dedicated instruments- so you get an incredible bang for the buck ;-)
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version