Products > Test Equipment
HP Logic Analyzer buyers guide-Sorting the wheat from the chaff.
djsb:
I've just been reading the post about the Inverse assembler use in various HP Logic Analyzers. Is there some kind of model reference somewhere where the various models can be compared? Which ones is it best to stay clear of because of either not being repairable or because of poor feature sets. Which model would you most recommend to someone who does reverse engineering on old equipment?
Thanks.
artag:
The main failing of older ones is lack of memory depth.
The main failing of cheap modern ones (USB streamers) is lack of width.
For looking at old machines, you want enough width to get data, address and control bits captured in state analyser mode. Some chips with multiplexed address and data bits can be used with narrower capture, provided the analyser allows you to acquire the same pins with different clocks.
I'd say the usable HP ones start with the 1630. They're big and nopisy but not as bad as the others of their day - Dolch etc. and they have enough width and depth to capture a useful instruction stream. 1650 / 16500 is a nice update but still a bit shallow depth for serial data - in fact, I'd use a cheap USB analyser for that. The 16500 A is floppy only. B adds hard disk (network optional). C adds network. Note that some of the plugin cards will only work in certain combinations - you need the later scope timebase to use with the later acq cards. Also note the analogue capture is only 6 bit. 16500 is a single knob and a touchscreen, the others have proper panels. As a result, it's much nicer to use with a mouse and keyboard.
1660 and onwards I'd think of as modern. Lots of other people here won't, and they're right :). I don't know much about the later ones.
All the above are CRT based. Not sure when LCD started. Also, at some point they started using Windows. Those tend to date faster imho.
gslick:
From 4 years ago:
--- Quote from: gslick on March 23, 2019, 01:27:00 am ---
One of the main limitations of the HP 1650 series is a 1K sample depth per channel, and on the HP 1660 series it is 4K sample depth per channel.
The HP 1670 series have at least 64K sample depth per channel, and up to 2M sample depth per channel. It is 1M sample depth an all 1670E while the 1670A, 1670D, and 1670G and sample depth options. A 1670E would be better than a 1670G without any options.
* HP 1670A mono CRT, 64K sample depth standard, 500K sample depth with Opt 030 (1996)
* HP 1670D mono CRT, 64K sample depth standard, 1M sample depth with Opt 30 (1997)
* HP 1670E color LCD, 1M sample depth standard (1999)
* Agilent 1670G color LCD, 64K sample depth standard, 256K sample depth with Opt 001, 2M sample depth with Opt 002, Scope with Opt 003, PatGen with Opt 004 (2000)
* 1670A, 1670D, 1670E, 1670G 136 channels
* 1671A, 1671D, 1671E, 1671G 102 channels
* 1672A, 1672D, 1672E, 1672G 68 channels
* 1673G 34 channelsFor the 16500 series, the main limitation of the 16500A is that it is dual floppy based, with no hard drive. That excludes support for the 16554A, 16555A/D, 16556A/D, 16557D with 1M or 2M sample depth. There is the 1K sample depth limitation of the 1650 series using 16510A/B modules, or the 4K sample depth limitation of the 1660 series using 16550A modules. (There are the 16540D and 16541D modules with 16K sample depth, and the 16542A module with 1M sample depth, but those are much less common than 16550A modules). The 16500A also does not have a LAN option. Both the 16500B and 16500C have hard drives. LAN is optional on the 16500B and standard on the 16500C.
If you are not local to pick up a 16500 series, the cost to pack and ship the system may exceed the value of a 16500A system. Shipping relative to the overall value should be lower on a 16500B or 16500C system depending on the modules and accessories included with the system.
Depending on your location you might even find better deals on a 16700 series system. Someone local to me has listed a bare 16700A on eBay for $20 a few times with no takers. Even at that low price I don't need another 16700A to make it worth my time to pick up that one.
If you don't have a lot of bench space then a 1670 series would be better than the larger and heavier 16500 and 16700 series, if you can find one available in your price target.
--- End quote ---
These days a lot of it depends on where you are located, and what is available near you, as the cost of shipping can be significant.
My personal favorite of the old school traditional HP / Agilent / Keysight logic analyzers now are the 168xxA / 16901A series.
Chernobyl:
One user's data point: I have a 102 channel HP 1661C (with the Ethernet option) which hasn't failed me yet for any testing that I've needed. As others noted above I wouldn't use it for decoding USB or serial bit streams (it's just not intended for that and modern tools are much better). But for 80X86, 6809, Z80, 6502, etc. debugging it is excellent. Honestly, I haven't found the 4K depth (actually 8K if used in half channel mode) to be a limitation at all because of the very comprehensive triggering capabilities (you only capture what you need). I wouldn't want to have to page through that much disassembled code in any case. The network interface is extremely useful though and I wouldn't recommend getting an analyzer without it. I can quickly download the complete capture (and disassembled code) and import it into MS Excel for the quick search/scroll capabilities.
My two bits.
alm:
Great summary, gslick from 4 years ago :) !
--- Quote from: gslick on February 05, 2023, 09:45:19 pm ---My personal favorite of the old school traditional HP / Agilent / Keysight logic analyzers now are the 168xxA / 16901A series.
--- End quote ---
Something to be weary of is that most of the logic analyzer boards for the 169xx series take 90 pin pods, which are really expensive on eBay. Older analyzers, from 1650/16500 up to 16753A 16752A (which does work in 16900) plus the 16910A/16911A, took the much cheaper 40 pin pods.
Still, if you want lots of channels than pods are a substantial cost if not included, so be sure to include that in your budget.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
Go to full version