Even has the multi channel demo signal connectors.According to the user manual, the "Trig Out" signal can be set to these connectors. So it should be quite easy to measure if it really has the 80,000 wfm/s of Waveform Update Rate. You would only need a frequency counter.
I wonder if this GW Instek is better made and if it has less bugs than Rigol DS2000... Who knows?
GW Instek is a company founded in 1975 with quite good raputation... http://www.gwinstek.com/en/Brandorigin_0.aspx (http://www.gwinstek.com/en/Brandorigin_0.aspx)
Instek makes nice oscilloscopes, and everything is fine as long as they work. They let us badly down when we needed to get one repaired.Here in Finland we've gotten our Instek scope repaired a couple of times without problems.
During all this Instek "support" in Taiwan couldn't care less. The showed the typical Asian attitude, going into stelth mode the moment there was a problem.Well, do you think that Rigol, Owon or Tekway are better? Anyway, if I needed a oscilloscope for my company, where the instrument runs 12 hours a day, I would buy an Agilent, or so. But for hobby use the GW Instek could be OK...
Has anyone seen these working? Claiming 800x600 screen resolution, but all the screen images I can find look really crappy - not just shonky in-house fonts, it looks more like they're doing pixel doubling.
Well, do you think that Rigol, Owon or Tekway are better? Anyway, if I needed a oscilloscope for my company, where the instrument runs 12 hours a day, I would buy an Agilent, or so. But for hobby use the GW Instek could be OK...
I'm not 100% sure how they normally go about it, but on such a square waveform (i.e the Instek screenshot) , I think you'll find the Rigol , and others for that matter would still show two pixel jumps on an 8 bit DAC. I can't see how you could interpolate those pixels below 2.. Maybe at a pinch on the second high transision there where it's a bit rounded off.
The fact the little noise blips on the top are 3 pixels high suggests it's not pixel doubling??
I think you'd need a Sinewave screenshot before even suspecting that to be honest :-//
I call bullshit on GW-Instek (and Hantek & Owon).
I am very sus of these budget scope makers who have rushed out larger screen 'resolutions'. I have had a good zoomed-in look at the images for both their 800x600 screens, the Owon is certainly using vertical pixel doubling for the waveform display. The Instek seems to be doubling (or worse) as well, but some doubt must be given due to no decent images available yet.
Have a look at the attached images - every single waveform pixel is actually 2 dots tall, by 1 wide (compare to 1x1 graticule dots for reference) . Now I realise that screen resolution does not equal measurement resolution, but if the scope is joining the dots, as per the default display mode, then I expect an expensive 800x600 scope to actual use that resolution for drawing the bl**dy lines! This is not just 'oh we've used a 2-pixel thick line' - the displayed line only steps up or down 2 pixels at a time. Seems to me the usual story - buy Rigol or better!
The problem with the GW-Instek DSOs seems to be getting your hands on one to try.There will be a trade fair in my city... http://www.amper.cz/ (http://www.amper.cz/) The Micronix company will probably display GW Instek products there. http://eshop.micronix.cz/merici-technika/elektricke-veliciny/osciloskopy/digitalni/stolni/gds-2102a.html (http://eshop.micronix.cz/merici-technika/elektricke-veliciny/osciloskopy/digitalni/stolni/gds-2102a.html)
Is it a real issue beyond looking ugly? For accurate readings you have to use the cursors anyway, trying to count pixels doesn't really work. The display issues could be solved by using anti-aliasing, but the used chipsets may not be up for that.
Yep, agree 100% - it is exactly a display issue. Enough to put me off buying though - I'm upgrading from typical 320x240. Agree, you wouldn't pixel count! Cheers.
First of all you can't simply take a unknown pictures from unknown setups and compare them.Thanks Tinhead, that's really good to see - shame they didn't choose to draw all the waveforms in 1x1 or 2x2, would have looked a lot cleaner! Good stuff, thank you.
Attached pictures from Tekway/Hantek, screen_1.png shows a typical screenshot, here with avg. wave. We can perfectly see
the 2x2 pixels when we zoom (screen_1_zoomed).png <- i've made a small scale so you can count pixels, one DIV is 50pix high.
But simply let snap that what the DSO is capable to do -> screen_1.png which is a noisy waveform. Can you see the diff
in the zoomed picture ? So yes, Tekway/Hantek can do 1x1 pixels on the screen.
Well, do you think that Rigol is better than GW Instek?
There will be a trade fair in my city... http://www.amper.cz/ (http://www.amper.cz/) The Micronix company will probably display GW Instek products there.You should definitely go check it out if you can. IF you do go, check the following: with the 3000 series, it appears (in some photos and videos) as if there is plastic installed in front of the LCD which causes bad reflections at certain angles or lighting conditions - check if the 2000A has the same thing.
Well, the GDS-3000 series has a protective plastic installed in front of the LCD, I saw it personally on an expo a few years ago. It is not bad... But this scope is too expensive for me, it has what the hell only 25kpts per channel and unspecified waveform update rate...
Then, there is a scope shop 30 minutes from my house... And it has been there for a long time. Not sure if I would buy from silcon.cz...
It seems that GDS-2000A has no fine vertical resolution setting, no "Vernier".
Well, please, what was the exact type of the Instek oscilloscope? And who was your reseller? Do you live in USA, or Europe?
Instek makes nice oscilloscopes, and everything is fine as long as they work. They let us badly down when we needed to get one repaired. (...)
We scraped the oscilloscope and blacklisted Instek.
I wonder if this GW Instek is better made and if it has less bugs than Rigol DS2000... Who knows?
GW Instek is a company founded in 1975 with quite good raputation... http://www.gwinstek.com/en/Brandorigin_0.aspx (http://www.gwinstek.com/en/Brandorigin_0.aspx)
Instek makes nice oscilloscopes, and everything is fine as long as they work. They let us badly down when we needed to get one repaired. They pointed to the distributor we bought from (authorized and all that), who wasn't at all equipped to service the oscilloscope and shipped the oscilloscope to yet another distributor who also failed to service it. From there it went to a third distributor, still not a real repair workshop. The couldn't even come up with a cost estimate. Month later it was returned unrepaired to the first distributor who returned it unrepaired to us. And in the end we were blamed for dareing we asked to get it repaired, and the first distributor had the galls to bill the shipping costs for that desaster to us.
During all this Instek "support" in Taiwan couldn't care less. The showed the typical Asian attitude, going into stelth mode the moment there was a problem.
We scraped the oscilloscope and blacklisted Instek.
(It is possible that I did something wrong, but I don't think so.)
Does anybody know if all models have the 80,000 waveform update rate? I read through the manual and didn't see where it says. I did notice however that the logic analyzer comes with I2C, SPI, and UART decoding only. Nothing else.
Does anybody know if all models have the 80,000 waveform update rate? I read through the manual and didn't see where it says. I did notice however that the logic analyzer comes with I2C, SPI, and UART decoding only. Nothing else.GW-Instek have published documents stating that the scope can reach 80k wfrm/s - and I would suppose that it's true (the company seems to be careful about publishing specs they can hit). And why wouldn't it be? It's not unbelievable given the current new generation of DSOs (i.e. Agilent InfiniiVision X series [50k - 1M], Rigol UltaVision series [50k - 110k], etc). Besides, as mentioned many times before - that would be the FASTEST the DSO could capture - at just ONE particular timebase setting. As shown in this chart I created for the Rigol DS2000 (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/first-impressions-and-review-of-the-rigol-ds2072-ds2000-series-dso/msg160064/#msg160064), waveform update rates change constantly based on timebase settings, channels turned on, etc.
GW-Instek have published documents stating that the scope can reach 80k wfrm/s - and I would suppose that it's true (the company seems to be careful about publishing specs they can hit). And why wouldn't it be? It's not unbelievable given the current new generation of DSOs (i.e. Agilent InfiniiVision X series [50k - 1M], Rigol UltaVision series [50k - 100k], etc). Besides, as mentioned many times before - that would be the FASTEST the DSO could capture - at just ONE particular timebase setting. As shown in this chart I created for the Rigol DS2000 (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/first-impressions-and-review-of-the-rigol-ds2072-ds2000-series-dso/msg160064/#msg160064), waveform update rates change constantly based on timebase settings, channels turned on, etc.
Marmad - I wasn't commetning about the wfm/s - I'm assuming you just hit "quote" on my post rather than reply. :)
I'm tempted to suck it up and order one of these to be the guinea pig for everyone - but I'd hate to get screwed in some aspect of it. I've been looking for a good bench scope to complement/replace my Picoscope 3206A as I don't like having to lug my laptop to my bench all the time and, on paper at least, the price/performance/features on this are looking good. I'm slightly cautious based on the interface, I'm not sure I'm loving it (compared to the Rigol/Agilent interfaces) from what little I've seen.
Here are the results of a quick test I did measuring the Rigol DS2072 waveform update rates at all timebase settings and memory depths (also attached in Excel format). If you compare these to the Agilent 2000X series published rates, it's obvious the Agilent is the clear winner - although it doesn't have anything close to the possible memory depths.The DSOX-2000 update rate does not go lower when you set a faster timebase...
Single channel - 1MHz square wave to Channel 1 - Trigger Out to frequency counter. I took best-case rate when it was fluctuating:
14kPts 140kPts 1.4MPts 14MPts 56MPts 5ns 15,000 13,150 1,412 142 36 10ns 9,400 9,400 1,412 142 36 20ns 50,012 13,515 1,416 142 36 50ns 25,003 13,515 1,416 142 36 100ns 17,859 13,159 1,412 142 36 200ns 11,365 11,360 1,408 142 36 500ns 5,434 5,435 1,336 142 36 1us 5,263 2,890 1,126 139 35 2us 5,054 1,506 846 133 35 5us 4,425 1,176 733 130 35 10us 3,789 1,157 720 130 35 20us 2,945 992 442 117 34 50us 1,326 639 414 114 34 100us 683 421 306 94 32 200us 347 245 200 69 28 500us 140 109 97 39 21 1ms 70 56 52 29 15 2ms 35 29 27 19 10 5ms ~14 ~13 ~11 ~9 ~6 10ms ~7 ~6 ~6 ~5 ~3 20ms ~4 ~4 ~3 ~3 ~2 50ms ~2 ~1 ~1 ~1 ~1 100ms ~1 ~1 ~1 ~1 ~1
Well, the waveform update rate of your former Owon SDS7102 was slow, but the Trig out signal was stable. Why not at GDS-2000A??? What else to say? The plug-in modules with 3MHz waveform generator and probably even the logic analyzer cannot be bought today, because they are still under development. They were not shown at the trade fair. Unfortunately there was no complex signal source (e. g. video signal) to check the digital phosphor (or visual persistance) capabilities. The autoset process is rather slow. There is no protective glass in front of the display, that you marmad, do not like. :)
The DSOX-2000 update rate does not go lower when you set a faster timebase...
Well, the waveform update rate of your former Owon SDS7102 was slow, but the Trig out signal was stable. Why not at GDS-2000A???
There is no protective glass in front of the display, that you marmad, do not like. :)
The 8 channel LA module is available for sale from tequipment.net -- the 16 is a "contact us" thing. The DDS is also listed for sale from tequipment ($245 USD).
The 8 channel LA module is available for sale from tequipment.net -- the 16 is a "contact us" thing. The DDS is also listed for sale from tequipment ($245 USD).I don't know... Maybe it is an preorder only.
A) 8x10 divisions kind of bothers me - scopes in this price range should be at least 12 horizontal
New videos made by ITTSBEurope.
I will admit I'm really turned off by that interface. I don't know what it is but for some reason it just looks (to me anyway) extremely ugly.
Bottom line until someone buys one and shares their experiences with it we're going to keep guessing. :(
Part of me wants to go "sure, I'll do it" but for my first bench scope replacing my USB scope I'm a bit nervous about jumping in. Honestly if the interface didn't look like it was made 10+ years ago I'd probably be more willing to be the guinea pig but I'm waffling back and forth right now.
Come on Instek - send Dave a demo unit so we can find out about this thing!
Honestly, I would be more worried about GW-Instek's seemingly complete lack of ability to promote, market, followup, and (according to some) service their scopes then I would be about the interface. I wrote them two detailed emails (cc'ed to various GW-Instek facilities around the globe) expressing interest in the 3000 series without the tiniest response from them - and I've heard many similar reports from others. Just look at the 3000 series - it was out for a couple of years and the only 'reviews' of it on the web were videos created by GW-Instek employees. I would be seriously worried about ever getting firmware updates from them to fix bugs.
Honestly if the interface didn't look like it was made 10+ years ago I'd probably be more willing (...)What exactly don't you like?? I think that this scope is easy to use, I tried it... But yes, it has no pushable knobs and it even has no fine vertical scale setting. But on the other hand, Tektronix also has almost no pushable knobs. Maybe Tek guys think that pushing knobs are unreliable...
A completely valid point. And a good one too. It's one thing to get no support on a $400 piece of kit, but if I'm spending $2000+ on something I'd like to know it'll be supported. Makes you wonder how they stay in business. I may stick with my plan of a Rigol 4014 or the used Agilent MSOX2024A.I'd go with the Rigol DS4014 (if I could have afforded the 4 channels I would have bought one of those instead of the DS2072) - I couldn't live with the miserly 100k of memory on the X2024. Have you seen the review and teardown of the DS4014 (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/rigol-ds4014-review-and-teardown/) that was posted in the last week?
What exactly don't you like?? I think that this scope is easy to use, I tried it... But yes, it has no pushable knobs and it even has no fine vertical scale setting. But on the other hand, Tektronix also has almost no pushable knobs. Maybe Tek guys think that pushing knobs are unreliable...
The GDS-2000A has even the color gradation, is it useful? It surely is a not common feature among middle class scopes...
Screen fonts are another thing, I prefer the OWON 7102 display over DS2202 Rigol as Owon has better resolution and 14x10 divisions.
This brings up one of the things that bothers me about DSO manufacturers - a way they can 'juke' the stats. ;) They mention the screen size in pixels - but they don't bother to mention what portion of screen real-estate the waveform is actually mapped to. The Agilent X2000 series is 10x8 (non-square) divisions mapped to only 640x400 pixels of screen space. I'm happy that the Rigol UltraVision series at least increased that to 700x400 (with 14x8 square divisions).
Screen fonts are another thing, I prefer the OWON 7102 display over DS2202 Rigol as Owon has better resolution and 14x10 divisions.
Agilent DSOX2000 is better for hunting random glitches, but how many people need it? On Rigol I don't like the fact that the cool multifunction knob is used probably only for records and for maybe nothing else. Am I right? And I am looking forward to the new firmware... ::)No, Hydrawerk, you're not aware of one of the many nice ergonomic features of the Rigol - you use the navigation knob a lot. Watch the video (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/first-impressions-and-review-of-the-rigol-ds2072-ds2000-series-dso/) starting from 15:15 and you'll see what I mean. :)
Additionally they provided a comparison between the Agilent 2000X and the GDS. Yes, it's not apples-apples and the memory and decode option change things on the 2000 side but it's still interesting (attached).
Additionally they provided a comparison between the Agilent 2000X and the GDS. Yes, it's not apples-apples and the memory and decode option change things on the 2000 side but it's still interesting (attached).
It's interesting they're not comparing it to the Rigol UltraVision series, which seems closer in price and features than the Agilent. But maybe that's because the Agilent's are the marker leaders - or maybe because the Rigol's match or surpass it in a couple of the comparison categories.
GDS-2000A has (?) 80 000 waveforms per second... But for what setting?? In is not specified anywhere in the manual. And I was unable to prove it when measuring the Trig Out signal. Even Rigol says clearly, when the scope reaches 50 000 waveforms/sec. The GDS-2000A has quite poor signal generator, only 3MHz, but there is no closer info.It says it right in the instructions you posted here: https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/gds-2000a-new-economic-oscilloscope-by-gw-instek-comes-to-market/msg205355/#msg205355 (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/gds-2000a-new-economic-oscilloscope-by-gw-instek-comes-to-market/msg205355/#msg205355)
Until someone proves it, I don't believe the 80 000 waveforms per second. ;)
ANd GDS-2000A has no fine vertical scale setting. Why?? And even no pushable rotating encoders. But it's still an interesting scope. As seen in the datasheet: It has a three year warranty - but excluding the lcd panel. Oh why?
And then the 80000 wfrms/s is a peak value, nobody knows, what it is like at 20ns or so...
It seems that GDS-2000A has no fine vertical resolution setting, no "Vernier".
There is no mention of the fine (=Vernier) vertical scale setting. Check the menu tree in the user manual. The GDS-3000 is the same, look into the manual, too.
No, the 1-2-5 refers to the standard pattern of oscilloscope vertical amplification settings that have been around forever.There is no mention of the fine (=Vernier) vertical scale setting. Check the menu tree in the user manual. The GDS-3000 is the same, look into the manual, too.
Right but the mention of the increment may mean the encoder has acceleration. In other words as you turn it faster the increments grow larger. Kind of like how an iPod scrolls with the wheel.
No, the 1-2-5 refers to the standard pattern of oscilloscope vertical amplification settings that have been around forever.There is no mention of the fine (=Vernier) vertical scale setting. Check the menu tree in the user manual. The GDS-3000 is the same, look into the manual, too.
Right but the mention of the increment may mean the encoder has acceleration. In other words as you turn it faster the increments grow larger. Kind of like how an iPod scrolls with the wheel.
For example: 1V, 2V, 5V, 10V, etc. with each click of the dial.
Vertical vernier is nice to maximize the size of the trace on the screen. You might have a waveform that is just a little over half the height of the screen, but when you go to the next higher amplification to get a better look, it becomes too big and clips off at the extremes. The vernier allows you to shrink it back down to fit in the screen.
this one, with 480 vertical pixels, and the Owon SDS line, which uses 500 vertical pixels -
Nope, it's 480 - I'm talking about the waveform display area, not the LCD size. Why would text info/icon/menu sizes or placement have an affect on ADC extrapolation/vertical vernier? The GW-Instek has 8 vertical divisions of 60 pixels = 480 pixels.this one, with 480 vertical pixels, and the Owon SDS line, which uses 500 vertical pixels -
Or is it 600 pixels? http://www.gwinstek.com/en/product/productdetail.aspx?pid=3&mid=7&id=1349 (http://www.gwinstek.com/en/product/productdetail.aspx?pid=3&mid=7&id=1349) Not trying to be an arse, just trying to establish whether we're talking about the same thing.
Nope, it's 480 - I'm talking about the waveform display area, not the LCD size. Why would text info/icon/menu sizes or placement have an affect on ADC extrapolation/vertical vernier? The GW-Instek has 8 vertical divisions of 60 pixels = 480 pixels.this one, with 480 vertical pixels, and the Owon SDS line, which uses 500 vertical pixels -
Or is it 600 pixels? http://www.gwinstek.com/en/product/productdetail.aspx?pid=3&mid=7&id=1349 (http://www.gwinstek.com/en/product/productdetail.aspx?pid=3&mid=7&id=1349) Not trying to be an arse, just trying to establish whether we're talking about the same thing.
Ah, I see what you mean. Thanks for clarifying.
I think I will be getting this scope. I am waiting for a response to another email to their sales team here in the US and based on that I will make a final decision. As a complement to my picoscope and for my needs this one looks good and it will finally allow for some active time with this scope so I can provide some detail on its usage. Could I spend a bit more for a "better" scope? Sure with the Rigol 4014 but there are trade offs there and the price difference can be used for other needed equipment. Instek has a solid reputation here in the USA so I don't think I'm going to get burned.
I think I will be getting this scope. I am waiting for a response to another email to their sales team here in the US and based on that I will make a final decision. As a complement to my picoscope and for my needs this one looks good and it will finally allow for some active time with this scope so I can provide some detail on its usage. Could I spend a bit more for a "better" scope? Sure with the Rigol 4014 but there are trade offs there and the price difference can be used for other needed equipment. Instek has a solid reputation here in the USA so I don't think I'm going to get burned.
So presumably this means you're thinking of getting the 4-channel version? Which BW - 200MHz?
Correct. The 2204A is what I am thinking.
Correct. The 2204A is what I am thinking.
Yes, at this point in time, the GW-Instek GDS2204A is quite a bit cheaper than the Rigol DS4024 - although I suspect Rigol may drop their prices in the not-too-distant future (just as Agilent has quickly introduced new 'options' for the X2000 series in response to Instek).
The main difference between the Instek and the Rigol (aside from VGA output and other non-essential things) appears to be the memory size - and the desirability of that in the work that you do. I do a lot of data-stream logging and analysis, so a large amount of memory for segmenting is fantastic and I couldn't bear to live without the 56MB in my Rigol - I've gotten so used to it :) - but for most DSO users it's irrelevant.
BTW, one other thing you might consider: in the current firmware of the DS2000 series, it's very easy to 'keep' all of the expensive 'trial' options (triggering, decoding, etc) indefinitely. I don't know if that's true for the DS4000 series, but if I was considering getting a 4-channel scope, I'd try to find out from a current owner. That's quite a lot of money later down the line.
Well, even the guys who presented the GDS-2000A could not make it better. I still think that there was an internal problem in the GW Instek scope. I have written an email to http://www.trinstruments.cz/stolni-osciloskopy (http://www.trinstruments.cz/stolni-osciloskopy) They answered that they still don't know what was wrong with the scope. They probably didn't manage to find the problem yet.Well, I don't know what else was tried since I wasn't there, but all I can tell you is that the settings of the Hameg in your video are not good for the measurement you were trying to perform. Look at the attached image from my Rigol, using the same settings of the Hameg - and an input square wave of 50kHz with a 5% duty cycle. This is with a sample rate of 1MSa/s - I can't get the Rigol to go down to the 500kSa/s rate of the Hameg:
We have a couple of these at work. Not really touched em as they look very cheap and crappy compared to Tek scopes.
Still the software seems good for a chinky scope. One design engineer at work swears by them.
Looks like Instek is taking the question of wfm/s seriously. They posted a video about it:Ha, ha... these GW-Instek videos crack me up. Brand X! I haven't heard that terminology used since TV commercials of my childhood :D
GW Instek GDS-2000A Waveform Update Rate Comparison (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-yS5YLWqf_Y#ws)
Ha, ha... these GW-Instek videos crack me up. Brand X! I haven't heard that terminology used since TV commercials of my childhood :D
But, Greg, have you been doubting that the DSO could actually do 80k wfrm/s? GW-Instek is a reputable company producing quality goods - I never thought they would advertise a spec they couldn't meet. But you noticed how he specifically mentioned setting the timebase to 500ns - and specifically mentioned setting the record length to short? Single channel, smallest sample size, 500ns timebase = fastest update rate. But the question is, what is it at other settings? So far, only the Agilent (with it's MegaZoom ASIC) has managed to reach a high rate and maintain it over several timebase settings.
I sure wish Dave had one to teardown, for the price these will be hard to beat if they'll last.
Meh. I hate decisions like this.
Meh. I hate decisions like this.
Will possible downtime of your DSO lose your money? If so, choose the Agilent. Will you be extensively using third-party analysis software (MatLAB, LabView, etc) or needing full remote control capability of the DSO? If so, choose the Agilent. Other than that, save yourself some money - and get an Instek or Rigol - which will do most other jobs just as well - or better.
You might have to be the first who tears one down, Doctor :)
It seems that this scope GDS-2000A is the same case as Tektronix DPO2000 series. The update rate is quite good (6200 waveforms/s) up to 100ns/div, and then at 20ns/div it drops dramatically down to only 160 waveforms/s.
According to the setting that I had in this video... But it is not a conclusion, it's only a hypothesis.It seems that this scope GDS-2000A is the same case as Tektronix DPO2000 series. The update rate is quite good (6200 waveforms/s) up to 100ns/div, and then at 20ns/div it drops dramatically down to only 160 waveforms/s.
How are you drawing that conclusion? We don't have any numbers other than their "ideal" at this point.
It seems that this scope GDS-2000A is the same case as Tektronix DPO2000 series. The update rate is quite good (6200 waveforms/s) up to 100ns/div, and then at 20ns/div it drops dramatically down to only 160 waveforms/s.
Just to clarify, you're not saying that the GDS-2000A actually has comparable update rates to the Tek DPO2000, but that, like the Tek, there's a 'headline rate' (80k wfm/s, in the GDS-2000A's case) which rapidly (more rapidly than the Agilent) drops off as you move away from the optimum? Also, am I imagining things or does the Rigol DS2000 do a similar thing? I'm sure I saw a table somewhere, but I can't find it now.
Just to clarify, you're not saying that the GDS-2000A actually has comparable update rates to the Tek DPO2000, but that, like the Tek, there's a 'headline rate' (80k wfm/s, in the GDS-2000A's case) which rapidly (more rapidly than the Agilent) drops off as you move away from the optimum?Yes, the top waveform update rate of GDS-2000A is better than Tek DPO2000.
Here are the results of a quick test I did measuring the Rigol DS2072 waveform update rates at all timebase settings and memory depths (also attached in Excel format). If you compare these to the Agilent 2000X series published rates, it's obvious the Agilent is the clear winner - although it doesn't have anything close to the possible memory depths.
Single channel - 1MHz square wave to Channel 1 - Trigger Out to frequency counter. I took best-case rate when it was fluctuating:
14kPts 140kPts 1.4MPts 14MPts 56MPts 5ns 15,000 13,150 1,412 142 36 10ns 9,400 9,400 1,412 142 36 20ns 50,012 13,515 1,416 142 36 50ns 25,003 13,515 1,416 142 36 100ns 17,859 13,159 1,412 142 36 200ns 11,365 11,360 1,408 142 36 500ns 5,434 5,435 1,336 142 36 1us 5,263 2,890 1,126 139 35 2us 5,054 1,506 846 133 35 5us 4,425 1,176 733 130 35 10us 3,789 1,157 720 130 35 20us 2,945 992 442 117 34 50us 1,326 639 414 114 34 100us 683 421 306 94 32 200us 347 245 200 69 28 500us 140 109 97 39 21 1ms 70 56 52 29 15 2ms 35 29 27 19 10 5ms ~14 ~13 ~11 ~9 ~6 10ms ~7 ~6 ~6 ~5 ~3 20ms ~4 ~4 ~3 ~3 ~2 50ms ~2 ~1 ~1 ~1 ~1 100ms ~1 ~1 ~1 ~1 ~1
I've made a command decision and I will be getting the 2204A. My reasoning is price/performance.
If you want EEVblog price for this GDS unit drop me an email, salesteam@tequipment.net Ref the EEVblog and me, Evan Cirelli.
I will authorize a discount.
One again everything thanks for the business.
Evan Cirelli
Vice President of TEquipment.NET
Yeah for the most part. I think I am going to set up a EEBlog coupon or discount. In the future we can give EEBlog pricing as a login but for now email us for a quote.
I want to be as honest and open with you guys as possible with pricing. We want your business.
Thanks
Evan
Someone should measure the waveform update rate for more timebase settings. I am afraid it will be worse than Rigol DS2000. :(
c) The Trigger-Out has an voltage range not higher than 200 mV AC, which varies significantly depending the time base of the scope and usually ranges from 120 mV to 5 mV and even less than that.What? Marmad used his multimeter to measure waveform update rate of his Rigol DS2000 and it was OK. http://youtu.be/gAY1GQEjrfc?t=2m51s (http://youtu.be/gAY1GQEjrfc?t=2m51s)
The only multimeter which had the proper sensitivity as frequency counter due their low mV range, plus the Min/Max/Average function, is the U1270A Series.
(...) 3) Avoid using a multimeter if possible, very few are capable for this task, if you have a sensitive and fast dedicated frequency counter capable for 4-5 measurements at the 100 KHz range … Use it.
What? Marmad used his multimeter to measure waveform update rate of his Rigol DS2000 and it was OK.
c) The Trigger-Out has an voltage range not higher than 200 mV AC, which varies significantly depending the time base of the scope and usually ranges from 120 mV to 5 mV and even less than that.
I should have it in my grubby little hands by the middle of next week.
Just measured the Rigol and it appears to have a Trigger Out voltage level of ~3.5V DC into 1M; ~1.5V into 50 Ohm.That's how it should be. I suspect that there is a hardware bug in early batch of GDS-2000A. The manufacturer knows it. The Taiwanese businessman at the trade fair told me not to use a multimeter to measure the Trig Out.
Just measured the Rigol and it appears to have a Trigger Out voltage level of ~3.5V DC into 1M; ~1.5V into 50 Ohm.That's how it should be. I suspect that there is a hardware bug in early batch of GDS-2000A. The manufacturer knows it. The Taiwanese businessman at the trade fair told me not to use a multimeter to measure the Trig Out.
I will not buy any GW Instek product, because the company has no subsidiary in Europe. :-- Are you from USA, grego? Then it's OK. The scope is nice and feature rich. Suitable for those who need the mask pass/fail test.
GDS-2000A has no High resolution mode, only 8 bit all the time.
Well the 2204A is in transit now. I should have it on Friday. More to follow once it's up and running.
Well the 2204A is in transit now. I should have it on Friday. More to follow once it's up and running.
Nice to hear - you'll be having some fun soon ;) Any chance you 'll do a small written or video review here?
Well someone followed Dave's advice *ahem* and "took it apart".I'm trying to research the ICs, and even with a photo magnification program, I'm having major issues viewing the model numbers. Would it be possible for "someone" to take some quality close-up photos, aiming for clarity? I'd really appreciate it. By the way, I grew up in LaGrange, also right outside Chicago. :)
The wavgen signals are coming from the removed cards on the PIC-E slots? Got any pics for the generator cards?
I'm trying to research the ICs, and even with a photo magnification program, I'm having major issues viewing the model numbers. Do you think you can't take some closer photos, aiming for clarity? I'd really appreciate it. FYI, I grew up in LaGrange, also right outside Chicago.
There are a couple of bugs I have found. Well one I'm not sure is a "bug" but might be a poor design decision.
BUG (and this is pretty damn minor):
- The graticule dots are on top of the image - e.g. they overlap the waveform. Really the graticule should be the lowest layer and the waveform should overlay it.
BUG/POOR DESIGN?:
The trig out, as had been mentioned elsewhere, is pretty damn low voltage - ~180-220mVAC as far as my Fluke 289 can tell me.
All measurements taken with a 500kHz sine wave. All results are in 1000s of wfm/s. Scope set to short memory depth.
Timebase Min Max Avg Notes
10us 6.85 8.4 7.88
5us 7.81 15.79 14.19
2us 19.23 34.25 22.81
1us 38.46 53.81 40.7
500ns 35.71 83.33 77.23
200ns 28.17 83.34 57.16
100ns 23.15 83.34 47.08
50ns 28.02 83.34 58.79
20ns 18.72 48.9 27.48 Picoscope started having problems calculating here
10ns 13.97 53.66 25.39 Picoscope started having problems calculating here
Metrics of wfm/s. Please note that this was done via my Picoscope and I'm not 100% happy with how it was reading some of the lower timebases so take it with a SLIGHT grain of salt.
Metrics of wfm/s. Please note that this was done via my Picoscope and I'm not 100% happy with how it was reading some of the lower timebases so take it with a SLIGHT grain of salt.
Thanks, Greg, for finally (after the whole Kiriakos thing) doing this correctly ;) Respectable numbers across all ranges. I'm curious why 500ns is the sweet spot for the Instek - I wish I knew more about modern DSO design to comprehend what that reveals about the nitty-gritty of the circuit/firmware choices.
I'm really not set up for video so trying to figure out how to stealth buy an entry level HD camera without my wife going bezerk on me. :)
Metrics of wfm/s. Please note that this was done via my Picoscope and I'm not 100% happy with how it was reading some of the lower timebases so take it with a SLIGHT grain of salt.So you say that the Trig out frequency is unstable and changes a lot? This is strange. Trig Out should be stable. Check Marmad's video. http://youtu.be/gAY1GQEjrfc?t=2m49s (http://youtu.be/gAY1GQEjrfc?t=2m49s)All measurements taken with a 500kHz sine wave. All results are in 1000s of wfm/s. Scope set to short memory depth.
Timebase Min Max Avg Notes
10us 6.85 8.4 7.88
5us 7.81 15.79 14.19
2us 19.23 34.25 22.81
1us 38.46 53.81 40.7
500ns 35.71 83.33 77.23
200ns 28.17 83.34 57.16
100ns 23.15 83.34 47.08
50ns 28.02 83.34 58.79
20ns 18.72 48.9 27.48 Picoscope started having problems calculating here
10ns 13.97 53.66 25.39 Picoscope started having problems calculating here
So you say that the Trig out frequency is unstable and changes a lot? This is strange. Trig Out should be stable. Check Marmad's video. http://youtu.be/gAY1GQEjrfc?t=2m49s (http://youtu.be/gAY1GQEjrfc?t=2m49s)
I'm slightly worried though, because I don't have 4-channel-$$ this rip, and the two channel has a gaudy looking empty space on the front panel.
Those pictures :o. Are you sure the lens is clean? I think maybe you might not want certain information visible, quite possibly? I don't know, but I really wanted to see which GSI chips it has hooked up to the FGPA. I read great write-ups regarding their quickness, but they have about 8 or so different classes (I don't mean MHz). I appreciate your effort, so please don't feel that I don't :). I'm considering this scope also, as I found the Rigol DS1102E to be less than I wanted. Greg have you ever had/used a Rigol oscilloscope? If not, have you ever owned/used a oscilloscope, other than the Picoscope, like in college maybe?
Why am I asking? I want to know if you have a reference for build quality, with an oscilloscope that I'm also familiar, so you could tell me just how solid the scope truly is. I thought the Rigol was pretty nice in the build department, minus the toy looking 'front-end/display panel' (not the screen, but that was an issue too). I'm slightly worried though, because I don't have 4-channel-$$ this rip, and the two channel has a gaudy looking empty space on the front panel. Good Will is retarded for that one! Plus that name, aghhh; I can see it now
"I bought a GoodWill scope."
Really, someone threw one out?
No, it cost me $830 dollars.
What?
Yeah, I bought it online from ....fill in the blank.
Oh! I thought you got it from the GoodWill store.
:palm: Aghh!
Unlikely around people who know electrical measurement equipment brands, but with all others, this conversation could very likely happen. I can't say that I'd like to have it, and I know I still couldn't stop myself from talking about the new scope I just bought with other people. LOL :D
Anyways, what do you think about the build quality, such as: plastic density of the paneling, knob quality (would you trust me to step on it, knowing it wouldn't break?), screen quality (is the real estate squandered?), operating system usability (is it friendly?). I know it's hard to knock something you just bought, for numerous reasons, but could you be objective? Thanks grego!
I'm slightly worried though, because I don't have 4-channel-$$ this rip, and the two channel has a gaudy looking empty space on the front panel.
IMO, from all I can tell from the specs, if you are only going for 2 channels, the Rigol DS2000 series still offers the best bang for the buck (better than the Instek GDS-2000A 2 channel or Agilent DSOX-2000). Since they all have very similar waveform update rates (you won't be able to tell the difference between 30k - 80k wfrm/s in daily use), you have to look at the other features to decide. OTOH, if you are going for 4-channels, the GDS-2000A definitely seems to be the new leader in best value for money.
I would tend to agree with Marmad on this -- if you're only going to splurge for a 2-channel the Rigol series probably provides the best bang/buck unless you need the MSO functionality. 4 Channel I'd say unless you need the crazy memory depth and/or 4GS/s of a Rigol 4000 that the Instek is a clear winner (so far) in that category. And if you need MSO then it's even easier.
I would add one more comment: if you're going to go with GW-Instek and spend >$1600, the choice between getting the GDS-2202A (200MHz / 2-channels / $1626) and the GDS-2104A (100MHz / 4-channels / $1694) seems a no-brainer. All of the models in each of these modern DSO series (Agilent X / Rigol UltraVision / GDS-2000A) are identical inside - so all of them can do every bandwidth in the range with simple firmware trickery. So there's always a chance that either a hack will be discovered - or, more likely, that as competition in the price range heats up, bandwidth upgrades will be sold. But adding 2 more channels is never going to be a option.
There are things I know they are adding in firmware (CAN decode), and things they are adding to their firmware roadmap (vertical vernier) and then things that I HOPE they add (hi-res mode) but overall I don't think you can argue with the bang for buck on this thing.Are you sure that you will be able to downoload a new firmware for GW Instek? It's not on their website! At Agilent it is very easy to download firmware from their website and there are even Release Notes (= changelog).
I like the big variable knob. On some scopes like Agilent or Rigol it is small.
If you look at the GDS-3000, it has no vernier (=fine vertical control). But it has hi-res mode. There seems to be no way to download firmware... http://www.gwinstek.com/en/download/downloadfilelist.aspx?id=1290 (http://www.gwinstek.com/en/download/downloadfilelist.aspx?id=1290)
The GDS-3000 is quite expensive scope. It has never been popular among hobbyists due to high price and short memory only 25kpoints per channel.
I don't think they are going to implement vernier in GDS-2000A. But never mind, it is a good bang per buck anyway. :-+ I don't know why there is no three-year warranty for the LCD display. ::)
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/gds-2000a-new-economic-oscilloscope-by-gw-instek-comes-to-market/?action=dlattach;attach=42473;image (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/gds-2000a-new-economic-oscilloscope-by-gw-instek-comes-to-market/?action=dlattach;attach=42473;image)
Marmad Well, the GDS-2000A front panel looks somewhat oldschool and uninteresting. Like it was saying honestly: "OK, folks, I am a cheap scope and it's no secret."
On the other hand, Tektronix also uses almost no pushable knobs, do they think that pushable knobs are not reliable or what? Well, they are not very innovative at all. Although I like their Wave Inspector feature.
Then loaded it in my computer and realized I didn't zoom in close enough to the screen so while I'm demo'ing thigns all you can really clearly see if the waveform. D'oh! I'll reshoot shortly.
@marmad I'll give that a try Sunday or Monday - I'm going to be out all day tomorrow so won't be able to poke at it.
Note:There is no way to have a two-channel function generator. The two BNCs at the front panel are only for fun. You will not get signal from both of them at the same time. :--
Even though it is possible to install two function
generator modules, only one function generator
option can be used at any one time.
Well, it's easy to buy a GW instek product in Europe or Czech Republic... But what would the support be like? You can buy at http://www.trinstruments.cz/stolni-osciloskopy (http://www.trinstruments.cz/stolni-osciloskopy) or http://eshop.micronix.cz/merici-technika/elektricke-veliciny/osciloskopy/digitalni/stolni?page=8 (http://eshop.micronix.cz/merici-technika/elektricke-veliciny/osciloskopy/digitalni/stolni?page=8)This is meaningless - of course I know you can buy Instek in Europe; you can buy almost anything anywhere in the world. For a company to actively pursue sales somewhere is something totally different.
GW Instek published an user manual for the plug-in function generator module. It's quite poor. Really basic.Dude, seriously? You are re-posting basically the same information that an actual owner of the DSO posted 2 messages before! These threads are long enough without repeating stuff that was just posted.
Don't go for the func-gen though as it sucks currently. I don't even know why they have it. 5Mhz, and only does square, sine and triangle. It's a waste of an expansion port if you ask me. I have the LA16 on order right now and should get it next week so I'll be able to poke around with that as well.
@Greg:
I theorized in another thread that perhaps the reason most of the new DSOs with fast update rates (Rigol UltraVision, Agilent InfiniiVision X, R&S RTO, etc) don't seem to be implementing ALT trigger mode is either to maintain their wfrm/s speeds - or perhaps as an implementation difficulty that arises from using digital triggers. Since the GDS-2000A series seems to be one of the few (or maybe the only one?) that still includes this feature, I wondered if perhaps for your video (or even just as a written post here) you could do a single test?
Set the scope to any timebase you want (maybe 500ns is good since it's the fastest) and check the waveform update rate first with 2 channels and any normal single trigger (Edge, Pulse, etc) - and then with 2 channels using the ALT trigger mode.
I'd be very curious to see if the results shed any light on this issue.
So to sum up - single trigger, no matter what kind and no matter how many channels, I was getting 80k wfm/s. ALT triggering and I don't have a good answer, but I can say that it didn't appear to be nearly as quick just based on visual reference.
2000A is new but someone off EEVblog did buy one from me if not more than 1 person.
Thanks
Evan Cirelli
TEquipment.NET
Hopefully I'll have some better video over this weekend - just ordered a new Canon HF M500 camera so it should make my life a lot easier. Stay tuned.
Could you post some pictures with FFT or mask test?
Hopefully I'll have some better video over this weekend - just ordered a new Canon HF M500 camera so it should make my life a lot easier. Stay tuned.
That's got the HD CMOS Pro image sensor, it'll give you some great shots. I have the HF M400 as my 2nd camera and it works a treat. The internal mics are good too.
See attached. Found another bug in the process.Thanks for pictures. The bug is really small.
Ok - first video complete. Be gently, it's my first time.Thanks for posting, Greg - I'm sitting down with a snack to watch right now :)
http://youtu.be/kbNKVD-ZoIY (http://youtu.be/kbNKVD-ZoIY)
I'll try to be a bit more organized and go point by point through some of the more interesting features the next time.
Yes you can do dots or vectors.
Ahhh... the sweet, sweet "where was that?" of early device ownership ;D
Nice, Greg - thanks for making and posting that. It was great to see it in action outside of the ridiculous robotic Instek engineers' videos (they really need to get these out to others for review instead of leaving it to their engineers) :) I will definitely have requests for the next video (I think you already know one from my PM to you).
One question: it wasn't completely clear from the video - can you turn off interpolation completely (i.e. just sample dots)?
You can see the menu option on the left at 10:45 for example.
Thanks for the video. It has good quality.
Well, does the scope really crash when you press Measure and Display all soft button? It's strange.
When you set the Record Length to short, how long is it? Is it 8kpoints, 100kpoints per channel or what?
Anyway, the statistics feature looks great although I am not sure if i would need it as a hobbyist...
I mentioned it in the video - but it sets it to 1M.
I mentioned it in the video - but it sets it to 1M.
I would think it would be 500k or 1M, depending on the mode you're in and other channels being on, no?
Hi Greg,
I'm very curious about the Instek's LA module. An in-depth demonstration of it's decode/analysis abilities would be greatly appreciated, if you have a circuit around to demo on.
c) The Trigger-Out has an voltage range not higher than 200 mV AC, which varies significantly depending the time base of the scope and usually ranges from 120 mV to 5 mV and even less than that.I think that some of the GDS-2000A scopes have a hardware problem. But your instrument is OK, it seems. As seen here: www.youtube.com/watch?v=hIOunSJxPEo (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hIOunSJxPEo#)
Grego, it seems that your Trig Out signal is 1.2 Volts peak-peak. That's low but still acceptable. What do you think about scope that was bought by Kiriakos A. Triantafillou? http://www.ittsb.eu/GDS-2102A%20Wfms%20measurments.html (http://www.ittsb.eu/GDS-2102A%20Wfms%20measurments.html)
He wrote:Quotec) The Trigger-Out has an voltage range not higher than 200 mV AC, which varies significantly depending the time base of the scope and usually ranges from 120 mV to 5 mV and even less than that.I think that some of the GDS-2000A scopes have a hardware problem. But your instrument is OK, it seems. As seen here: www.youtube.com/watch?v=hIOunSJxPEo (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hIOunSJxPEo#)
I'm not going to generalize with "some of the GDS-2000A scopes have a hardware problem". Especially since I appreciate what Kiriakos has done but I don't think he's measuring things 100% correctly -- I wish he had a second scope at his place to verify his data with.Well, it seems that Kiriakos measured the 80 kHz spikes with his multimeter. Multimeter never shows you Vpp, it shows Vrms.
For me it looked like that the waveform capture is not continuous, picoscope screenshots showed long periods with no trigger out pulse at all. I think I saw this in Instek marketing video too. Perhaps this could be further checked?
Regards,
Janne
I noticed that the Tek DPO3000 series listed in their tables (and also the Tek DPO2000/4000 to a lesser degree) has a very similar wfrm/s output graph to the GDS-2000A series. And by output graph, I don't mean the absolute rates (the Instek is clearly faster at many timebase settings) - I mean that both of their wfrm/s rates ramp up - and then stay high - to the 50ns/div setting (or thereabouts), and then drop way down for the final few settings.
Well, really? Then it means that measurements by Kiriakos are wrong. http://www.ittsb.eu/GDS-2102A%20Wfms%20measurments.html (http://www.ittsb.eu/GDS-2102A%20Wfms%20measurments.html)Of course, it was obvious when he posted them that his equipment wasn't reading the low-level signal correctly - and that his figures for < 50ns were wrong. I tried to explain that to him but he didn't seem to understand; he seems to think he discovered something that the GW-Instek engineers overlooked :D
It has arrived... and yes, that green tape is our friends at Homeland Security and Border Protection having opened my box when it hit the shores in Long Beach. Go-go government bureaucracy!Hey, my brand new DSOX-2002A was not packed in a plastic bag. Oh, why? :scared:
(http://i.imgur.com/M2bEB50.jpg)
(more coming later once I get home and play with it over the weekend)
According to the manual the GDS-2000A has no fine vertical or horizontal setting. Just like Owon SDS series... But Rigol, Agilent and others have fine vertical and horizontal settings.
This might be not a big disadvantage.
I can give that a whirl. Only up to a 1MHz right now but I will post the results.
Demo signal optically isolated? Why? It's unlikely.
I haven't had as much time as I would like to fart around with it of late but overall my thoughts:
1. The scope "feels" good. I like they layout of the controls. One thing I kind of wish they did was provide a rubberized ring on the outside to improve the feel of the rotary knobs a little bit.
2. I wish the traces were a little bit finer - it doesn't look like there's pixel-doubling going on but for lack of a better term the "thickness" of the traces. Not major.
3. Scope is very responsive to control changes which is great. No delays.
4. Feature-rich for the price - I mean really, I got it for ~$1700 USD for a 200Mhz 4 channel scope with good manufacture, quality components and a company that has a solid reputation here in the US.
5. As I mentioned before the responses from Instek have been top-notch. I just got a reply back from engineering on my latest complaint of not being able to remove the Go-NoGo min/max lines. They outlined the 'procedure' to remove it and added they are sending it back into engineering to make it easier (because, to be honest, what they outlined was stupid).
6. I wish I could speak more about the LA but I just have NOT had time to sit down with it yet so I can't speak to it. However, I know you can decode off the digital lines at least. :)
Overall, I'm really happy with the expenditure, with the caveat that I need to spend time with the LA to justify that $800 purchase. I mean for what I need it's a scope that I will be able to use for years. I completely understand that I 'overbought' on equipment - I didn't NEED 200Mhz, I didn't NEED the MSO function but it's all helpful and to be hones the price delta wasn't large enough for me to really worry about it. So for a first bench scope to replace my Pico 3206-A I'm completely satisfied.
There will be more coming once I have some breathing space to sit down and cover some more features. Between work, my kids soccer schedule and school for me I've been pretty busy. And heck, Iron Man 3 opens this weekend too. ;-)
Try how is the waveform update rate affected by turning on more channels, eight auto measurements, FFT or cursors. On my DSOX2002A it is not affected at all by anything. On the other hand, you have only 4 auto measurements + DVM, it's not much for a four channel scope. :-[ Well, my scope is 2 channel, but it could be 4 channel.
Thanks! That fills in some of the missing blanks - and the review of the LA I can easily wait for. :) My only other ongoing desire-to-know is: with all of the posting about interpolation / type of interpolation / affect on sampling, etc. that a number of us have been doing these last weeks, I'd like to know what a waveform looks like on the Instek when undersampled. The Rigol switches to linear interpolation - which, although a little boxy, is symmetrical - and the Agilent just makes a total mess of it (I don't even know what it's doing - but it's screwing up the samples somehow). Is the Instek still using sin(x)/x at slower sampling speeds? If so, how does it look? The test I mentioned before (with a reasonably fast sine wave) would satisfy my curiosity - whatdayasay? Huh? Puh-leeeeze? (I'm banking on your reveal of fatherhood) ;)
Here you go - 1Mhz sine, dropped down to 10ms which gave me a 10MSPS rate, single-shot, zoomed in to 200ns. Looks like it's keeping sin(x)/x to me.
Here you go - 1Mhz sine, dropped down to 10ms which gave me a 10MSPS rate, single-shot, zoomed in to 200ns. Looks like it's keeping sin(x)/x to me.
Great, thanks very much for that! Yes, it's definitely sin(x)/x - and it looks good too. :D I'm only wondering how you know your sample rate; I don't see it on the Instek's display.
It's under the Acquire menu (which I didn't leave up in this since it was single shot). Basically, bring up the Acquire menu and one of the buttons shows the sample rate. I upped the timebase until it read 10MSPS and then single shot it. :)
Oh, not really, if you work mainly with digital signals, you may rather need long 56Mpoints memory and you don't care about waveform update rate because you use Single shot most often.
I 'overbought' on equipment
:-+ You can never go wrong with Agilent.
It's under the Acquire menu (which I didn't leave up in this since it was single shot). Basically, bring up the Acquire menu and one of the buttons shows the sample rate. I upped the timebase until it read 10MSPS and then single shot it. :)
Nice... any chance you can do the exact same thing one more time in 'dots' mode (no interpolation)? I know, I know, I'm keeping you from your kid's soccer - or Iron Man 3 - but it won't take too much more time ;)
Attached. Interestingly at the lower timebase it looks like its connecting the dots -- I included two so you can clearly see it's in dots rather than vectors.
Attached. Interestingly at the lower timebase it looks like its connecting the dots -- I included two so you can clearly see it's in dots rather than vectors.
Thanks for taking the time, Greg. Though I'm not 100% sure I'm understanding whats happening: are you saying it's displaying the dots until you go below a certain time base setting - and then all of a sudden the interpolation comes back on again? If so, that sounds like it might be a bug - there would be no logical reason for having the firmware override your settings.
Or do you have another bad experience?
That's what I'm saying - those two pictures above were the exact same capture, the only difference is the time base setting I zoomed in to. I can't think of anything else that's happening there since it's a continuous line in the 200ns image.
It's called "terror of the unknown". :)
I'm trying to find some time to do some follow-up work - marmad had a couple of questions he PM'd me and I know there's interest in the LA module so that'll likely be my next effort. I just have to get one of my dev kits set up to provide some RS-232 and I2C and such so I can demonstrate it.
If I ever get off my butt I may do a teardown as well.
Ah, if only I didn't have a job and a family and had unlimited funds this would be so much easier!
Thanks for the thumbs up.
FYI
Goodwill are sending me a GDS-2000A direct for teardown.
FYIThat's great... I am looking forward to a comparison with DSOX2000 or Rigol DS2000.
Goodwill are sending me a GDS-2000A direct for teardown.
Regarding the Table No 2 and those 140,000 wfms/s in those low Time base settings, my measurements are all correct, and totally repeatable.? ? ? ?
Those readings it can possibly cause some confusion when it comes to direct comparisons, mostly because this increase of wfms/s is totally undocumented in the specifications of the GDS-2102A.
Another video made by GW Instek guys.
I think the Instek Demo Guy is incorrect in commenting at the end about the overshoot and Under-Shoot, which I think are just Sin(x)/x interpolation effect like the one shown below.
FYI
Goodwill are sending me a GDS-2000A direct for teardown.
Any news on this front, Dave?
I finally watched the video. :palm:
Well, that's no new information that GDS-2000A has longer memory.
But you can buy a memory upgrade for DSOX2002A.
I shot a video playing with the GDS2000A series for the first time. I must say I was rather disappointed and underwhelmed.
Have you posted the video, Dave?
I must say I was rather disappointed and underwhelmed.Did you miss the pushable knobs? I don't know why GW Instek doesn't use them. Are they expensive or what?
Rendering now. It's 1:10 long!
Will take all day to upload and process.
For these ridiculously long videos I'm very temped to trancode to 1280x720 instead of full 1920x1080, just to get the upload time down to a reasonable figure.
I like the color gradation feature but what is it good for?
I shot a video playing with the GDS2000A series for the first time. I must say I was rather disappointed and underwhelmed.OH NO. That doesn't sound like a good start - thanks for the pre-notification. I'm quite interested in the DSO, x-ing fingers.
Did you miss the pushable knobs? I don't know why GW Instek doesn't use them. Are they expensive or what?
Anyway, I think that the GDS-2000A is quite feature rich scope but not so easy to use. I like the color gradation feature but what is it good for?
I shot a video playing with the GDS2000A series for the first time. I must say I was rather disappointed and underwhelmed.Thanks Dave! Been looking forward to it and am very excited to watch it!
Quote from: EEVblogI shot a video playing with the GDS2000A series for the first time. I must say I was rather disappointed and underwhelmed.OH NO. That doesn't sound like a good start - thanks for the pre-notification. I'm quite interested in the DSO, x-ing fingers.
Quote from: EEVblogI shot a video playing with the GDS2000A series for the first time. I must say I was rather disappointed and underwhelmed.OH NO. That doesn't sound like a good start - thanks for the pre-notification. I'm quite interested in the DSO, x-ing fingers.
Well, to be fair, I was probably ab it overly harsh on it, and really I made quite a few mistakes and wrong assumptions at first.
It's probably a better scope than my ranting will make out.
But bottom line is it doesn't seem to have the same spit'n'polish like the Rigol and Agilent does.
I need more time to learn to drive it properly.
Also, the function gen is very basic. just sine/square/triangle to 5MHz and no modulation or AWG
Also the dual channel is a bit of a con. You need to buy two separate modules to get both channels. Thus using up all your slots. So no room left for the logic analyser or LAN modules. BUt grant, you can just swap them as needed.
Thanks in advance for what will be a fine and fun video no doubt!
they need a better industrial product designer.
I think you nailed it - they should hire someone who does the knobs and buttons and maybe the rest of the cosmetic packaging for Lexus, or Agilent :) - but I'm still betting that if the LA is good that the 2000A product series will succeed despite the less than Apple quality packaging.
Thanks in advance for what will be a fine and fun video no doubt!
Sorry, but it's not a "fine" video, nor a review. It's me playing randomly with the thing for an hour after opening the box.
I'll wait for inevitable complaints...
Sorry, but it's not a "fine" video, nor a review. It's me playing randomly with the thing for an hour after opening the box.No problem, Dave. I am excited to see a review on it, of course - not to mention a tear down! - and I'm sure lots of other people are anxious to see one too. Even just seeing you get some hands on time will be great though, and a big help for everyone curious about this new scope! Some may complain without cause, but you're doing us quite a service and we should all be grateful for it - so hope you can shrug them off and not be bothered.
I'll wait for inevitable complaints...
Well, to be fair, I was probably ab it overly harsh on it, and really I made quite a few mistakes and wrong assumptions at first.
It's probably a better scope than my ranting will make out.
But bottom line is it doesn't seem to have the same spit'n'polish like the Rigol and Agilent does.
I need more time to learn to drive it properly.
Also, it's quite big, the fan is a bit loud, and they need a better industrial product designer. IMO it looks a bit cheap and toy like.
The problem is that I had fairly high expectations for this, and on first use it didn't shape up.
Also, the function gen is very basic. just sine/square/triangle to 5MHz and no modulation or AWGI think that you will never get a real two channel signal generator.
Also the dual channel is a bit of a con. You need to buy two separate modules to get both channels. Thus using up all your slots. So no room left for the logic analyser or LAN modules. BUt grant, you can just swap them as needed.
Dave, what firmware version is that scope on?
I don't think individual thresholds per channel is very useful, and if there is no way to set them all globally, it would be a total PITA to have to set them individually.I think you nailed it - they should hire someone who does the knobs and buttons and maybe the rest of the cosmetic packaging for Lexus, or Agilent :) - but I'm still betting that if the LA is good that the 2000A product series will succeed despite the less than Apple quality packaging.
The LA at least has full threshold voltage settings on every channel, so in that respect it's a "real" logic analyser. I have not tried it any further with actual data yet.
I think that you will never get a real two channel signal generator.
I'm not sure that is the case with Dave's review.I think that you will never get a real two channel signal generator.
I don't understand it. Why does it have two function gen outputs to begin with, if you can only enable one at a time?
I'm not sure that is the case with Dave's review.
What can seen is basically 2 extension slots that can populate either: 2 Gens,or 1 Gen + 1 LAN, or 1Gen + LA, or 1 LA + 1 LAN, ...etc
2 Gens, because otherwise it would have had only 1 BNC for 1 Gen .
Note:??
Even though it is possible to install two function
generator modules, only one function generator
option can be used at any one time.
Yes, one of my hesitations - if I was in the market - would be the industrial and GUI design; both the Rigol and Agilent series 'look' modern and sexy - it does not.GDS-2000A's screen looks like Tektronix... :palm: I am not familiar with those expensive Teks. The intensity gradation is really crap.
Thanks in advance for what will be a fine and fun video no doubt!
Sorry, but it's not a "fine" video, nor a review. It's me playing randomly with the thing for an hour after opening the box.
I'll wait for inevitable complaints...
And Dave, what do you think about the fact that this scope has no fine horizontal or vertical control? It's strange. Most scopes do have fine settings (at Rigol and Agilent you only must push the knob). Well, only Owon doesn't have fine settings, as far as i know.
Well, I am not sure. The expensive GDS-3000 from 2011 has no fine controls till today.
Was there a better implemented digital phospor technology (aka intensity grading)?
what do you mean with better? There is nothing wrong on GDS-2000A, use color grading and you a winner.
Lets not read too much into it yet. Let Dave do his tear down and full review.
Lets not read too much into it yet. Let Dave do his tear down and full review.A) I'm not saying it's impossible that Dave's settings were off - and better results might be gotten - but honestly, Greg, the intensity grading in the video you posted doesn't look very good to me (and that was at a time base that the Instek supposedly does ~13,000 wfrm/s). You could help sort this out by posting an image from the Instek which is similar to this one I just captured from my Rigol:
i don't see any problem with color grading implementation,
...and i can clearly see that on Rigol you need to turn the knob for an hour ^^ to get from min to max).
i don't see any problem with color grading implementation,
Color grading uses a lookup table from the intensity values - if the intensity values are coarse, the color grading will be as well..
Quote...and i can clearly see that on Rigol you need to turn the knob for an hour ^^ to get from min to max).
Again, you're spouting nonsense about the Rigol which is untrue. There is rarely a time when you have to turn a knob very long on the Rigol - it uses TWO knobs (slow/fast) for any variable that has a wide range - plus it has software acceleration implemented on it's encoders - which the Instek seems to be lacking.
Maybe because you did before him? Why not.
B) I doubt whether Dave will ever do a full review - he never went back and did one of the Rigol DS2000
ehm you don't know how it is implemented on GDS in detail, me either. All i can see is that it works as it should when
set to color grading.
I don't give a shit if there is acceleration or 20 knobs and 6 buttons for super fine intensity on Rigol - all i need to see is there on video - meaning how long it takes and what he is doing.
...and i can clearly see that on Rigol you need to turn the knob for an hour ^^ to get from min to max).
I guess you don't have to give a shit because you're full of it.
Then you post this ridiculous shit about those 33 seconds:
To me it looks like GDS-2000A is unable to do shading in "density"-fashion (something that velocity modulation of electron beam produces in analog oscilloscopes).
i don't see any problem with color grading implementation,
Color grading uses a lookup table from the intensity values - if the intensity values are coarse, the color grading will be as well..Quote...and i can clearly see that on Rigol you need to turn the knob for an hour ^^ to get from min to max).
Again, you're spouting nonsense about the Rigol which is untrue. There is rarely a time when you have to turn a knob very long on the Rigol - it uses TWO knobs (slow/fast) for any variable that has a wide range - plus it has software acceleration implemented on it's encoders - which the Instek seems to be lacking.
plus it has software acceleration implemented on it's encoders - which the Instek seems to be lacking.
You should know me better Mark. Cool down a bit.
To me it looks like GDS-2000A is unable to do shading in "density"-fashion (something that velocity modulation of electron beam produces in analog oscilloscopes).
Fyi, I used the "report to moderator" link below Tinhead's post above. "This post escalated personal attacks beyond reason. Wasn't the first post in the series but this or the post it quotes went over the top."I guess you don't have to give a shit because you're full of it.no, i'm not from US, so no chance, not full of brainshit. Jealous? or simply menstruation?
You should know me better Mark. Cool down a bit.
Fyi, I used the "report to moderator" link below Tinhead's post above. "This post escalated personal attacks beyond reason. Wasn't the first post in the series but this or the post it quotes went over the top."I guess you don't have to give a shit because you're full of it.no, i'm not from US, so no chance, not full of brainshit. Jealous? or simply menstruation?
You should know me better Mark. Cool down a bit.
I'm usually pretty impressed with the respect everyone shows each other (even with there's no basis for said respect haha) and the good taste in the language used. Some disagree about "sh*t", and Dave uses it himself occasionally, but it's over my line for use in public. Further, a general statement about a whole country and a dig on women has no place here - at least not on this part of the forum.
Sorry to be "up tight" but hopefully all posts involved are removed or edited and this is put in the past without further issue.
Edit: clarification
Further, a general statement about a whole country
and I hope Thomas felt the same
Well, it's your prerogative to report this, but you should know that Thomas and I have a personal relationship - having exchanged many private messages and emails - so speaking for myself (and I hope Thomas felt the same), I never felt the attacks were personal, but were merely 'roughhousing' (that, admittedly, we perhaps pushed too far).Ah, I wasn't aware. That's a little better I suppose. I'm so used to the "Internet" being a place for anonymous people to attack each other in stupid, offensive ways that I assumed that's what was happening. I expect that on the Huffington Post and Fox News webpages but was pretty taken aback to see that here on EEVblog!
in Europe we can (still) luckily speak free, about womans, Al Quida, US, what so ever ... we don't have any problems with whatsoeverThe right to speak free is fine and good - as an American I believe it in too - but sometimes one chooses to be polite and chooses not to exercise their right to be rude. I can tolerate quite a bit of insult about the USA (and acknowledge some is deserved) but there are few enough women in electronics the way it is. We may as well try to make them feel welcome, eh?
skin color, abortion, jesus, asgards, islam, 09/11 magic planes or G.W.B.
....
And btw, a general statement that chinese manufacturer producing only crap/copycat is ok? Wakeup, G.W.B. is not anymore.
....
Anyhow, I see now you and Marmad are friends so that's good - I know how that goes haha. Just maybe realize if you're goading each other in a public space you may raise eyebrows among those who don't know better.
... but there are few enough women in electronics the way it is. We may as well try to make them feel welcome, eh?
What do the dvm module?I could not find any info anywhere. (GW Instek web, user manuals...)
Looking at it Rigol copied the Agilent path and Instek copied the Tek path. (...) the Instek doesn't function like Dave expects it to - e.g. like the Agilent.Well, Rigol is quite different from Agilent. They have their very own style. DS2000 and DSOX2000 are not similar especially with the screen layout.
One thing I will be grilling the US based Instek guys about though is the persistence levels since that kind of irks me a little bit and I would like a straight answer.
-G
One thing I will be grilling the US based Instek guys about though is the persistence levels since that kind of irks me a little bit and I would like a straight answer.Greg, I don't know if you saw this post of mine (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/blog/eevblog-474-gw-instek-gds-2000a-series-oscilloscope-unboxing-fi/msg238248/#msg238248), but you could probably figure out fairly easily (using intensity or colors) how many levels of gradation the Instek is actually doing. Perhaps it varies based on some other setting (persistence?), but I can only find evidence of 16 in screenshots.
What do the dvm module?I could not find any info anywhere. (GW Instek web, user manuals...)
Ok, we know that the DPO is not a strong point of GDS-2000A.
My DSOX2002A almost never goes slower.
I'm usually pretty impressed with the respect everyone shows each other (even with there's no basis for said respect haha) and the good taste in the language used. Some disagree about "sh*t", and Dave uses it himself occasionally, but it's over my line for use in public. Further, a general statement about a whole country and a dig on women has no place here - at least not on this part of the forum.
And Dave, what do you think about the fact that this scope has no fine horizontal or vertical control? It's strange. Most scopes do have fine settings (at Rigol and Agilent you only must push the knob). Well, only Owon doesn't have fine settings, as far as i know.
And Dave, what do you think about the fact that this scope has no fine horizontal or vertical control? It's strange. Most scopes do have fine settings (at Rigol and Agilent you only must push the knob). Well, only Owon doesn't have fine settings, as far as i know.
I didn't notice that. If that's the case then that's stupid, they need to fix that.
they need to fix that.Well, they should, but this expensive GDS-3000 also has no fine vertical or horizontal controls. http://www.gwinstek.com/en/product/productdetail.aspx?pid=3&mid=7&id=1290 (http://www.gwinstek.com/en/product/productdetail.aspx?pid=3&mid=7&id=1290)
Ok, we know that the DPO is not a strong point of GDS-2000A. Now let's discuss it's other features. IMHO the XY mode is well implemeted and sophisticated (see manual) but I don't know what is it useful for. :-// :-//
My DSOX2002A almost never goes slower. 8) 8) Because it can show only 4 auto measurements and has rather small memory 50kpoints per channel. And no statistics feature. :palm: :palm: :-[
Hello, what do you think about the new GDS-2000A series? GW Instek web here. (http://www.gwinstek.com/en/product/productdetail.aspx?pid=3&mid=7&id=1349) You can download manual or specification there. It seems to be a serious competitor for Rigol DS2000 series. The price for GDS-2000A is quite the same. 100 MHz, 2-channels GDS-2102A is sold for $1,143 at Testequity (http://www.testequity.com/products/4715/).
Please do not confuse the GDS-2000 with GDS-2000A, they are totally different. See attached pictures. Yes, I do not know, why they chose the GDS-2000A name... :-//
And features, as specified by the manufacturer.
*300MHz/200MHz/100MHz/70MHz Bandwidth ,2 or 4 Input Channel
*2GSa/s Real-time Sampling Rate and 100GSa/s Equivalent Time Sampling Rate
*2MegaPoints Record Length (When using one channel, probably...)
*1mV /div to 10V/div of Vertical Range
*1ns/div to 100s/div of Time Base Range
*80,000 wfm/s of Waveform Update Rate (I wish it was true...)
*8 inch 800*600 High Resolution TFT LCD Display (Very good!)
*Built-in Segmented Memory and Waveform Search Functions to Optimize the Efficiency of Record Length
*Zoom Window and Play/Pause can Rapidly Navigate the Waveforms
*36 Automatic Measurement Functions Offers Various Measurement Selections
*Optional 8 or 16 digital channel with Logic analyzer(MSO)
*Optional Function Generator (but probably only to 3 MHz)
*Flexible Remote Control Connectivity(Standard:USB ;Option:LAN/GPIB)
Finally, it has a better XY mode than Rigols... It has cursors in XY mode.
Update:
Photos and screenshots here. Please note that I was not an experienced user of this scope, when I took the pictures. :)https://plus.google.com/photos/106264218831814439783/albums/5857196858625060337
(https://plus.google.com/photos/106264218831814439783/albums/5857196858625060337)
Dave's video
EEVblog #474 - GW Instek GDS-2000A Series Oscilloscope Unboxing & First Impression (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cRe9b7iV6Kc#ws)
XY mode is handy when viewing phase information or any 2 waveform with xy relationship. One application is in AB encoders where you get sin cosine outputs, If your xy plot is an oval you know the read head is not positioned right.Agree, and more over:
Well, there are those weird things on the function generator PCB. Someone apparently forgot to draw a route on the PCB. Well, i didn't see this inside Rigol or Agilent scopes. :palm: :palm: :--
No shielding over the switched power supply? Oh, Rigol and Agilent have shielding. Folks, this GDS-2000A looks overall designed to be as cheap as possible... (Even no pushable knobs...)
And note that the logic analyzer of your GDS-2000A is probably good and Rigol has nothing like it yet.
Yeah, where is the Rigol 2000 Logic Analyzer?
And the Rigol 4000 Logic Analyzer?
How and when do we get those? :)
I thought someone mentioned on here it's in the pipeline?
They are, I talked specifically with Rigol about this at the Dayton Hamvention. A "couple months" was the timeline mentioned.
They are, I talked specifically with Rigol about this at the Dayton Hamvention. A "couple months" was the timeline mentioned.
Is that for the 2000 series?
I wanted to thank you for informing me about David Jones video on the GDS-2304A. Hopefully we will receive a more favorable review once he has used the machine for a few weeks.
Our team in Taiwan has looked into your question over the EE blog, and will be responding shortly.
I got a note back from InstekUSA today - they escalated to engineering in Taiwan and we should be seeing some responses from them on this forum in the near future.QuoteI wanted to thank you for informing me about David Jones video on the GDS-2304A. Hopefully we will receive a more favorable review once he has used the machine for a few weeks.
Our team in Taiwan has looked into your question over the EE blog, and will be responding shortly.
I think they are going to be commenting on the color-grading issue (since I brought that up in my email) among other things. I specifically asked about that and the stuttering Dave saw at times. I also pointed them at the video itself and both this thread and the one about the specific episode and begged to get an engineering to watch and respond.
I agree I don't think they will discuss specific details on construction but hopefully the software-related ones we can get some feedback.
Well, there is only one oscilloscope with true dual function generator.
Well, nobody still has found out what's the GW Instek's logic analyzer like. It might be better than in my DSOX2002A (not enabled by code yet.) At least the GW will have longer memory, I think.
Well, nobody still has found out what's the GW Instek's logic analyzer like. It might be better than in my DSOX2002A (not enabled by code yet.) At least the GW will have longer memory, I think.
We've played with it a bit here. A boon is that it comes with a few serial decode abilities for free with the analyzer. So that's pretty cool. An unfortunate limitation is that you can't decode serial buses using analog channels. To see analog channels and decode you have to double probe the signal, which of course doubles the loading effects on the DUT. Big bummer there.
We are working on FW 1.14 and waiting for 1.15 as we speak so perhaps that changed?
V1.15 Change log
Fixed position adjustment error for average mode
Fixed the data missing issue during the GPIB high-speed data transmitting
Added horizontal expand mode (optional APP installation required)
Yep, just installed it. Nothing much changed. According to their changelog:QuoteV1.15 Change log
Fixed position adjustment error for average mode
Fixed the data missing issue during the GPIB high-speed data transmitting
Added horizontal expand mode (optional APP installation required)
Trying to figure out what that last one is.
The Expand by Center option will scale the
waveform from the center of the display when
the waveform is scaled using the TIME/DIV
knob.
The Expand by Trigger Pos will scale the
waveform from the trigger position when the
waveform is scaled using the TIME/DIV knob.
Well, nobody still has found out what's the GW Instek's logic analyzer like. It might be better than in my DSOX2002A (not enabled by code yet.) At least the GW will have longer memory, I think.
Of course, if I had to guess which document is correct
So no chance two of that shown function generator modules can work at the same time. Maybe not even if you hack one and change its output pin to GEN2. The oscilloscope software probably doesn't support it.
So no chance two of that shown function generator modules can work at the same time. Maybe not even if you hack one and change its output pin to GEN2. The oscilloscope software probably doesn't support it.
In Dave's video, the FG module is first using the GEN2 output. Later, after he's swapped the modules in back, the FG module is using the GEN1 output.
With a simple, fixed output pin on the module, and the GEN1 connection going straight through to both sockets I leave it up to you to explain how you think that magic can happen.I was just responding to your statements about the GEN2 output. I'm not saying one way or the other if the DSO can support 2 FGs.
On the other hand, the GEN2 output (the one not used)...
Hydrawerk, have you had any experience using the LA in your DSOX2002A? Or nothing yet? If yes, what do you like about it, what would like to see different - any and all thoughts on the LA functions would be welcome. If you have already posted somewhere regarding the LA (or know of posts on the LA by other users) please let us know the link(s). Thanks, EFWell, I don't have the digital probes, but I could start the 30-day trial so i tried the LA a bit. You can connect signals directly to the digital connector of your scope. It works. You don't need any special digital probe with built-in electronics. But now my trial has gone and I am not gonna buy the LA option licence DSOX2MSO... http://www.home.agilent.com/en/pd-1953247-pn-DSOX2MSO/infiniivision-2000-x-series-oscilloscope-mso-upgrades?cc=CZ&lc=eng (http://www.home.agilent.com/en/pd-1953247-pn-DSOX2MSO/infiniivision-2000-x-series-oscilloscope-mso-upgrades?cc=CZ&lc=eng)
...I'm really liking the "2M record length (per channel)" in the picture you attached, but given the discrepancies in Instek documentation I mentioned here (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/gds-2000a-new-economic-oscilloscope-by-gw-instek-comes-to-market/msg240270/#msg240270) I'll believe it when someone verifies it.
Nothe that GDS-2000A logic analyzer has 2Mpoints per channel. It's much better.
I'm really liking the "2M record length (per channel)" in the picture you attached, but given the discrepancies in Instek documentation I mentioned here (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/gds-2000a-new-economic-oscilloscope-by-gw-instek-comes-to-market/msg240270/#msg240270) I'll believe it when someone verifies it.Well, there seems to be 16M x 16 {32M x 8} of DRAM available - so assuming they mean 2M maximum when none of the analog channels are on, it's possible. Greg would be able to verify this reasonably quickly.
... Could a GDS-2000A owner please confirm the external dimensions of the scope? Including knobs and all protrusions, ie, what are the inside dimensions of the smallest rectangular box that would just barely fit the scope? ...Have any owners had the chance to measure its dimensions yet?
Edit: The scope only, probes, power cord, and logic analyser or other protruding options removed.
...Maybe most know this by now, but I just found what might be bad news in the manual (http://www.testequipmentdepot.com/instek/pdf/gds-2000a_manual.pdf). The last sentence on page 114 reads: "Please note that digital channels are not supported for measurement using segments."
Note that GDS-2000A logic analyzer has 2Mpoints per channel. It's much better.
Have any owners had the chance to measure its dimensions yet?Oh, I believe what they say in the user manual (EDIT) about dimensions.
Oh, I believe what they say in the user manual.:-DD You're kidding, right? :P
Note that GW Instek provides no photo of scope's intensity gradation like this. http://www.rigolna.com/images/products/DS2000.jpg (http://www.rigolna.com/images/products/DS2000.jpg)Then again, Instek's photo shows several digital inputs while Rigol's photo doesn't show any.... ;)
Their photo has no gradation shown.
http://www.gwinstek.com/product/images/picture/FC_2012109144736.jpg (http://www.gwinstek.com/product/images/picture/FC_2012109144736.jpg)
Interesting - this post (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/blog/eevblog-474-gw-instek-gds-2000a-series-oscilloscope-unboxing-fi/msg243214/#msg243214) over in the "EEVblog #474 - GW Instek GDS-2000A Series Oscilloscope Unboxing & First Impression" topic has a video from TEquipment showing segmented memory working with the logic analyzer. So yet another direct contradiction to what's in the manual, though this time it is a positive contradiction.... Could a GDS-2000A owner please confirm the external dimensions of the scope? Including knobs and all protrusions, ie, what are the inside dimensions of the smallest rectangular box that would just barely fit the scope? ...Have any owners had the chance to measure its dimensions yet?
Edit: The scope only, probes, power cord, and logic analyser or other protruding options removed.
...Maybe most know this by now, but I just found what might be bad news in the manual (http://www.testequipmentdepot.com/instek/pdf/gds-2000a_manual.pdf). The last sentence on page 114 reads: "Please note that digital channels are not supported for measurement using segments."
Note that GDS-2000A logic analyzer has 2Mpoints per channel. It's much better.
And here, I thought the segmented memory would be a big help with capturing a string of messages on a bus. Of course, the decode only works on the digital channels. So it appears you can either....
There is new firmware for this scope that fixes a lot of stuff apparently:Thanks for the link! Just visited their site and it wasn't obvious how to get to it from there. I won't have a chance to install it myself until next week, but I'm very curious to know how it goes for you and what the updates are!
http://webfile.gwinstek.com/ftp/GDS-2000A/GDS2K_V1.17.upg (http://webfile.gwinstek.com/ftp/GDS-2000A/GDS2K_V1.17.upg)
Will go install it now.
Thanks for the link! Just visited their site and it wasn't obvious how to get to it from there. I won't have a chance to install it myself until next week, but I'm very curious to know how it goes for you and what the updates are!
Here are the changes:Interesting. Hope the knob sensitivity adjustment fixes the bug where the selection occasionally goes against the direction of rotation a step or two when turning the knob slowly. That's been one of the more annoying things for me so far - makes the knob feel really cheap and wishy-washy. Thanks for the extra info!
http://www.ittsb.eu/forum/index.php?topic=547.0 (http://www.ittsb.eu/forum/index.php?topic=547.0)
[...]I don't know anything about Micro-Controllers, but I do know you can buy a Rigol DS2072 (70 MHz) and upgrade it to 200 MHz with just a licence code. Some people have even figured out how to do that for free. Rigol display is way better than Instek I reckon. Much easier on my eyes.
RIGOL 2102
or
GDS - 2102A(I don't like the non-expandable memory).
This is my first scope to buy and I work on Parallax Micro-Controllers.
Thanks for any help
Howard
Well my mind was set on the Instek til I seen you last post about un-locking more triggering points. I don't mine paying a little more if it will make it a Head -to- Head matchup. I will be paying USA prices and both were at $1143.00 but the Instek is on sale for $971.00. I do like the ability to expand the Instek with the Two(2) modules. I may never use the 2 meg. memory but it does seem a bit low by todays standards.
Dave seems to be the main Man for doing all the Main testing, do you know if a Head -to- Head was ever done on these Two(2) units? I could not find any true test on this Website.
Thanks again.
Howard
Yea, that's the problem with most of these scopes. Marketing gimmicks. But I still think, for what you're paying, just go buy an Agilent.
Yea, that's the problem with most of these scopes. Marketing gimmicks. But I still think, for what you're paying, just go buy an Agilent.Agree with Marmad 100%. DS2072 is great. I considered Agilent, before buying the Rigol, glad I didn't waste my money.
Hello Again,For a 2-channel scope, nothing beats it (DS2072) on price. Specially once it's laden with all the extra features! :-+
Another day in the Scope search. After looking at more You Tube video's, I going to buy the Rigol 2072. Looking a the comparison with the Owon 3000 series, that made up my mind.
Thanks for all the help. I was set on the Owon until I saw all the reviews and demo video's.
Thanks again
Howard
There is new firmware for this scope that fixes a lot of stuff apparently:
http://webfile.gwinstek.com/ftp/GDS-2000A/GDS2K_V1.17.upg (http://webfile.gwinstek.com/ftp/GDS-2000A/GDS2K_V1.17.upg)
Will go install it now.
...Has anyone had a chance to try out the new firmware yet?
Here are the changes:
http://www.ittsb.eu/forum/index.php?topic=547.0 (http://www.ittsb.eu/forum/index.php?topic=547.0)
Well, oh...Thanks for the link! Just visited their site and it wasn't obvious how to get to it from there. I won't have a chance to install it myself until next week, but I'm very curious to know how it goes for you and what the updates are!
Here are the changes:
http://www.ittsb.eu/forum/index.php?topic=547.0 (http://www.ittsb.eu/forum/index.php?topic=547.0)
Well, oh...Felt off-topic at first getting into how Agilent does things but I see how it's relevant as a comparison. Would be nice if Instek took a page from Agilent's book on firmware updates.
At Agilent it is very easy to find new firmware and changelog on their website http://www.home.agilent.com (http://www.home.agilent.com) And you do not need any registration.
It is strange to find the GW Instek changelog on a greek forum... ???
Have you seen this competitive datasheet DPO2000B vs. GDS-2000A?On this gwinstek.com (http://www.gwinstek.com/en/product/productdetail.aspx?pid=3&mid=7&id=1349) page you can find their own "Comparison fact sheet between GDS-2000A and Tek MSO/DPO2000B". Of course it's biased to show the Instek having more checks and the Tek having more x's haha.
Well, come on... The GW Instek has a search function, too. Don't you know it, Tektronix guys??Nice catch - I've actually used the search feature and it's kind of nice. Way better than scrolling and scrolling and scrolling. Still a little "clunky" but I might not notice that as much when I'm more used to how it works.
Have you seen this competitive datasheet DPO2000B vs. GDS-2000A?
Well, Tektronix DPO2000B can have active probes (that are bloody expensive). But that is not a big advantage for a hobbyist.
... I think they are targeting the 1000 unit/order, institutional type.
... I think they are targeting the 1000 unit/order, institutional type.
I wonder who would possibly have a need to order 1000 scopes at once? Maybe if all the universities in a state (or several states) all got together and decided on one?
Not meaning to be critical or take you too literally - it just provoked my imagination and now I'm wondering.
There is new firmware for this scope that fixes a lot of stuff apparently:So is the scope better now? Was the intensity grading feature improved?
http://webfile.gwinstek.com/ftp/GDS-2000A/GDS2K_V1.17.upg (http://webfile.gwinstek.com/ftp/GDS-2000A/GDS2K_V1.17.upg)
Will go install it now.
Now GW Instek published their firmware directly on their website. That's good. http://www.gwinstek.com.tw/en/product/productdetail.aspx?pid=3&mid=7&id=1349 (http://www.gwinstek.com.tw/en/product/productdetail.aspx?pid=3&mid=7&id=1349)Sweet! That is good news - thanks!
Go to the Download section. Then go to the Software section.
Also please download the Firmware upgrade guide.
Sadly I'm still swamped and haven't had a chance to try out the update myself. We'll see about this weekend. I hope the knob sensitivity adjustment smoothes out the knob action. The enhanced SW and VPO performance also sounds great - maybe someone will be clever enough to find a way to measure the performance improvements?
c) The Trigger-Out has an voltage range not higher than 200 mV AC, which varies significantly depending the time base of the scope and usually ranges from 120 mV to 5 mV and even less than that.http://www.ittsb.eu/GDS-2102A%20Wfms%20measurments.html (http://www.ittsb.eu/GDS-2102A%20Wfms%20measurments.html)
GW Instek GDS-2000A is now sold rebranded as Texio DCS-9700 Series.Good Will Instrument Co., Ltd. [a.k.a. GW Instek] is now the owner of Texio [formerly Kenwood TMI] according to Texio's website:
http://www.texio.co.jp/en/03prod_01_03_DCS-9700.html (http://www.texio.co.jp/en/03prod_01_03_DCS-9700.html)
Shareholder Good Will Instrument Co., Ltd.History: http://www.texio.co.jp/en/02comp_03.html (http://www.texio.co.jp/en/02comp_03.html)
2012
...Established TEXIO TECHNOLOGY CORPORATION affiliated of GOOD WILL INSTRUMENTS CO.,LTD
Power supply and electric measuring instruments business have been transferred to TEXIO TECHNOLOGY from NIKKE TECHNO SYSTEM...
Fast question. This GW instek GDS-2072A vs RIGOL DS2072A. Which one to choose?For 70 MHz, 2 analog channels, and no digital channels most will probably agree the Rigol is better.
Will be used for hobby projects and some more advanced power electronics projects.