Is the RiGOL DS1054Z still Dave's choice for under $500?

[JenniferG]

Just watched Dave's video on this scope,  but the video is 7 years old:
Timestamped to Dave's Verdict: https://youtu.be/ETCOhzU1O5A?t=596

I want a four channel scope, deep memory, triggers/decoders enabled, 100mhz.  And the Rigol DS1054Z has all of that.

My only real concern -- with my very limited knowledge -- is about the display update speed. I heard the newer affordable Sigilents are quite a bit faster?  I see a good affordable Sigilent 2 channel on sale for $287 right now on Amazon, but I really want four channels.

https://www.amazon.com/Siglent-Technologies-SDS1202X-Oscilloscope-Channels/dp/B06XZML6RD

The only scope I have currently is the analog scope: Tektronix 2225.

Best price I see on the Rigol DS1054Z is on Amazon for $418 -- don't know of any sales (e.g. black friday)

[gpr]

Rigol DS1054Z was the only budget 4-channel scope at that time. But now, newer and more capable 4ch scopes are available, though slightly more expensive.
My personal go-to 4ch scope for ~500$ budget would be Siglent 1104X-E (hackable to 200Mhz, 2ADCs). There is slightly cheaper X-U version as well.

1104X-E is better than DS1054Z in almost every aspect, including UI speed.

[nctnico]

If you are in the US then take a look at the GW Instek GDS-1054B (hackable to 100MHz). It is about the cheapest option to get a decent 4 channel scope on the US market. The Rigol DS1054Z is very outdated.

This company typically sells them at a low price; there is an additional discount for EEVblog forum members
https://www.tequipment.net/Instek/GDS-1054B/Digital-Oscilloscopes/?search=true

[Fungus]

The Rigol DS1054Z is very outdated.

I wouldn't go that far, it still does the same job and this isn't a world with new models every six months.

If you're in the USA though, get the Instek. The price of those has dropped massively since Dave's video. The bandwidth will be slightly lower but it's a nicer 'scope.

[JenniferG]

Was reading a bit about the Gwinstek GDS-1054B.  It doesn't have ANY serial decoding?  The Rigol DS1054Z has quite a bit in that regard.

[gpr]

https://www.gwinstek.com/en-global/products/detail/GDS-1000B

I2C/SPI/UART/CAN/LIN serial bus trigger and decoding functions

[nctnico]

https://www.gwinstek.com/en-global/products/detail/GDS-1000B

I2C/SPI/UART/CAN/LIN serial bus trigger and decoding functions

Indeed. From what I've read the current models should have all this enabled out of the box. If not, then these can be enabled using a simple key-generator that can be run in your web browser.

[Adrian_Arg.]

hello, I have a released rigol ds1054z, I use it 3 or four times a month, I keep doing the same as when I bought it, electronic projects and arduino, esp32 etc, it works perfect, I'm 56 years old I don't think I'll invest in one again But if I had to buy my first oscilloscope today, I would buy the Siglent 1104X-E, which is more modern.
but I repeat, I am very satisfied with the ds1054z, I am a hobbyist, I don't need more.

in spanish
hola, yo poseo un rigol ds1054z liberado, lo uso 3 o cuatro veces al mes, yo sigo realizando lo mismo que cuando lo compre, proyectos de electronica y arduino, esp32 etc, funciona perfecto, tengo 56 años no creo volver a invertir en uno, pero si yo tuviera que comprar hoy mi primer osciloscopio compraria el  Siglent 1104X-E que es mas moderno.
pero te repito, estoy muy conforme con el ds1054z, soy hobbysta, no preciso mas.

[2N3055]

Just watched Dave's video on this scope,  but the video is 7 years old:
Timestamped to Dave's Verdict: https://youtu.be/ETCOhzU1O5A?t=596

I want a four channel scope, deep memory, triggers/decoders enabled, 100mhz.  And the Rigol DS1054Z has all of that.

My only real concern -- with my very limited knowledge -- is about the display update speed. I heard the newer affordable Sigilents are quite a bit faster?  I see a good affordable Sigilent 2 channel on sale for $287 right now on Amazon, but I really want four channels.

https://www.amazon.com/Siglent-Technologies-SDS1202X-Oscilloscope-Channels/dp/B06XZML6RD

The only scope I have currently is the analog scope: Tektronix 2225.

Best price I see on the Rigol DS1054Z is on Amazon for $418 -- don't know of any sales (e.g. black friday)

I would go and take a look at T&M vendors instead of Amazon. You might get better prices.Some even give additional EEVBLOG discount.

Any of the 3 scopes mentioned are capable of doing the job of beginners scope. Rigol is a bit slow at times and it shows it is cheapest, GW instek is nicer, and Siglent SDS1000X-E has most capable hardware, best analog performance. Any of the 3 will be amazing first scope. I would lean towards GW Instek and Siglent because there are things they do much better (like FFT, which can show you spectrum of signal).

But really any of the 3 will be good beginners scope.

[Fungus]

Was reading a bit about the Gwinstek GDS-1054B.  It doesn't have ANY serial decoding?

Yes it does. They added it a couple of years ago.

(and before that you could add it yourself by copying the decoder module over from a higher-up model)

[Martin72]

Hi,

From the three mentioned scope I´ve owned two, rigol and siglent.
Once the rigol was a true gamechanger, no doubt about it.
It opens a new world for hobbyists with low budget, IMHO the first "serious&cheap" scope.
The siglent is better in several ways, more "adulter".
At work we still got both scopes here, once they were bought for decoding spi, first the rigol, then the siglent (it do this better).
GwInstek I don´t know, we got functiongenerators and milli-ohm meter from them, but no scopes.

[EEVblog]

I do believe the general concensus is that the Siglent is the more bang-per-buck option, but the Rigol is cheaper and still a pretty good option.
I don't know if my original 1054Z is still the current hardware and suitable for a modern shootout?

[Martin72]

Won´t believe they (rigol) have changed anything.
We got three DS1054Z at work, from 2016 up to 2019, without any differences between (after firmware updates).
Edit:
A shootout of the actual avaible cheapos is a good idea, not less want to see this.

[Fungus]

I do believe the general concensus is that the Siglent is the more bang-per-buck option, but the Rigol is cheaper and still a pretty good option.

They used to be approx the same bang:buck - Siglent was better but proportionally more expensive.

The price of the Rigol has been creeping up lately though so the ratio has changed.

The Instek has dropped a lot in price in the USA (but not the rest of the world for some reason). It now costs about the same as the Rigol over there. It's nicer and more capable than the Rigol.

Don't get trapped thinking "If only..." though. If the Rigol is all you can get your hands on then get the Rigol. It will completely transform your work if you don't currently have a 'scope.

I don't know if my original 1054Z is still the current hardware and suitable for a modern shootout?

Hardware hasn't changed.

[ledtester]

For discounts, do this advanced forum search:




tequipment.net and saelig.com are US-based distributors that have had (and probably still have) discounts for eevblog members.

[tautech]

At one time stock 54Z vs stock 4ch X-E, the X-E had a better features set as Decodes were free and it offered WiFi, MSO and AWG options at additional cost.

Today decodes are now part of the 54Z feature set but Logging and NTP clock have been added to the 4ch X-E feature set.
Standing still is never an option however ppl seem to think 5 yr old videos relay the current state of affairs....they don't !

[nctnico]

I do believe the general concensus is that the Siglent is the more bang-per-buck option, but the Rigol is cheaper and still a pretty good option.
I don't know if my original 1054Z is still the current hardware and suitable for a modern shootout?

Don't forget to include GW Instek 1054B and MicSig TO1000 in such a shootout. Depending on location, prices can be very competitive between those models.

[EEVblog]

I do believe the general concensus is that the Siglent is the more bang-per-buck option, but the Rigol is cheaper and still a pretty good option.
I don't know if my original 1054Z is still the current hardware and suitable for a modern shootout?

Don't forget to include GW Instek 1054B and MicSig TO1000 in such a shootout.

The Micsig is not a comparative bench scope.

[EEVblog]

Don't get trapped thinking "If only..." though. If the Rigol is all you can get your hands on then get the Rigol. It will completely transform your work if you don't currently have a 'scope.

Totally. Local price might ultimately determine what's right for you.

[bdunham7]

You missed it--the Siglent SDS1104X-E was on sale for a bit for $399.  I've no idea whether it will be again, but for the same price it would be the clear choice.  The Rigol would be in last place among the three scopes mentioned here, but it is still not bad.  I had one, the Siglent is clearly better.  The GW-Instek I haven't tried but those that have them seem to like them.

If you can double your budget    $999 will get you a whole lot more...

https://www.tequipment.net/Siglent/SDS2104X-Plus/Digital-Oscilloscopes/?v=0

[tautech]

Then we need also consider what constitutes a satisfactory spec for a beginners 4ch DSO, 4channels and bugger all else or a specific feature set to grow into ?
Experienced users might decide on only just the basics as they know exactly what they need.

BW, what BW is sufficient for a beginner to work with for true and accurate reproduction of waveforms ?
At one time it was 10, then 20, then 30, then 50 however in the time we've been doing this 100 MHz has been our bottom limit knowing a better instrument can serve you for longer.

Feature set.
How much is too much or the more the merrier ?
What does the scope novice need and expect ?

[Martin72]

The Micsig is not a comparative bench scope.

I don´t know if they claimed it actually, but I was surprised to read this on the batronix website a few yrs ago.
Or more precisely, they wrote Micsig is good but can´t compete to rigol and siglent scopes.
And they are micsig distributor..

[tautech]

The Micsig is not a comparative bench scope.

I don´t know if they claimed it actually, but I was surprised to read this on the batronix website a few yrs ago.
Or more precisely, they wrote Micsig is good but can´t compete to rigol and siglent scopes.
And they are micsig distributor..

I could be too as they keep knocking on our door but I don't see any advantage in taking them on.

[balnazzar]

Don't forget you can Bode plot on the Siglent. Sooner or later, one *has* to do some basic FRA. It has even be hacked so to allow Bode plotting with cheap non-Siglent AWGs. Like, the fy6900-6600 for sure.

OTOH, the1104x-e is damn loud (no idea about 1054Z or Instek loudness).

[nctnico]

I do believe the general concensus is that the Siglent is the more bang-per-buck option, but the Rigol is cheaper and still a pretty good option.
I don't know if my original 1054Z is still the current hardware and suitable for a modern shootout?

Don't forget to include GW Instek 1054B and MicSig TO1000 in such a shootout.

The Micsig is not a comparative bench scope.

Ofcourse it is. Don't get fooled by the form factor; it is a full fledged bench oscilloscope. It has all the right features to make it a true bench oscilloscope. Rock solid firmware as well. It is not a 'typical' handheld/portable DSO-ish device that can only show some wiggly lines. You'd be wrong to leave the MicSig TO1000 (or one of the recent incarnations with knobs) out in a US $500 price bracket shootout.