Kind of a meaningless statement, its better in some ways worse in others. Better screen, better noise, 4x less wfm/s (in normal mode), 4x less sample rate:
4x less sample rate (for
1 channel on the Rigol) while the Siglent has 4X more vertical resolution for all 4 channels. For me I'll give up 4x waveforms for 4x vertical resolution every day and all day. And lower noise? That is pretty significant. So your Rigol can capture 450K history pages over the Siglent's 95K pages. Have you every tried going through 95K history pages? It takes many hours. 450K would take days .. no one in their right mind is going to use that feature.
Memory depth? 200Mpts for each 2 channels on Siglent .. On the the Rigol 200Mpts shared across 4 channels.
Screen size? 10.1" for Siglent .. 9" for Rigol
Time Base 10x more precise on Siglent (1ppm vs 10ppm on Rigol)
External trigger in, trigger out and pass/fail simultaneously on Siglent .. Trigger out OR fass/fail on Rigol (no both and no ext. trigger). This another hugely important thing.
Built in WFG? 50MHz on Siglent .. 25MHz on Rigol
Vastly more configurable FFT on Siglent.
Maximum BW? 500MHz on Siglent .. 350MHz on Rigol.
I could go on ..
The Rigol is a nice scope, but the Siglent is just plain a better scope.