HDO4204 vs. SDS2104X HD - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / testgear

author: dpenev
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: December 15, 2022, 10:15:54 am
content: Hello,Tring to compare Rigol HDO4204 and Siglent SDS2104X HDBoth 4 channels, 12 bits Oscilloscopes.Rigol HDO4204 pros:1. More powerful platform RK3399 (dual-core Cortex-A72 and quad-core Cortex-A53) compared to Zynq(Armv7)2. 4Gs/s - twice as big sampling rate3. Potential for 800MHz BW (Siglent can go up to 500MHz I think)4. Bigger screen resolution5. Slightly less expensiveRigol HDO4204 cons:Stability and Scope app/UI seems to be not as polished as Siglent SDS2104X HD is.HDO4204 may or may not improve significantly in time.Anyone willing to share his opinion?

author: 2N3055
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 15, 2022, 11:21:36 am
content: Quote from: dpenev on December 15, 2022, 10:15:54 amFirst step would be to download datasheets for the two and start from there?They are actually quite different if you look closer. They are both 12bit but serving different markets..- Rigol and Siglent have 2x 2GS/s ADC. Only difference is when using only one channel. When using 2Ch + they are the same. Siglent decided not to offer combining 2xADC for 4GS/s..........- If you look at CH to CH isolation SDS200X HD has SPECTACULAR >70dBC for less than 350MHz and >60dBC for less than 500MHz signals.... Compare that to ≥100:1 (from DC to 500 MHz), ≥30:1 (＞ 500 MHz to full bandwidth) for DHO4000... maybe choice not to interleave all those signals was a smart choice?- 800 Mhz is useful with only one channel used.- Bigger screen resolution is usable only with external monitor. Things are already small to begin with. Scope is not a smartphone you can get closer to face to see details... That being said, DHO4000 has external monitor connector,SDS2000XHD does not.- DHO4000 is less expensive but is 4ch analog only scope. No signal generator, no digital inputs,no MSO... We could argue that it is more expensive capability wise.. If you need those, of course.- We had recently quite a few people making a noise (pun intended) about how acoustically loud instruments are. SDS2000X HD is easily acoustically quietest scope with a fan I ever used. First day I went to check if fan stopped working.. So for some people that might be interesting. Not that I care, but for some people it is important apparently...- Input noise in both is comparable, with Siglent having slightly less noise on some ranges and slightly more on some. Claimed Rigol figures are for heavily filtered BW limited signal. SDS200X HD has full 500MHz BW down to 500uV/DIV and has a bit of less noise for full BW. It can also use software magnification to achieve 100uV/div like DHO4000 (it is software magnification on Rigol too)- Siglent has much larger input signal offset ranges (it actually has it better than most scopes out there regardless of brands). That is very useful for power applications.- There are many little details where you see SDS2000X HD is at different maturity level. Look at the timebase accuracy specifications for instance... one manufacturer specifies :±2 ppm initial (0~50℃); ±0.5 ppm 1st year aging; ±3 ppm 20-year aging, the other one: ±1.5 ppm ± 1 ppm/year... See the difference?- There are many other little differences.. everybody must make a choice what is important for them.- Siglent has been on a market for a time now. It is a working platform that is in active production. Rigol won't reach that stage for some time and only then we will see what exactly will it be. Both manufacturers will probably be adding features in meantime. If you need to buy something that works now and is stable than Siglent is better choice. If you can wait, wait and see..I'm not saying that Rigol will not get there. It actually looks promising. There are some interesting features. But it will take time to get there before it is something I would buy to do real work. Today it is still beta test product released to customers..And, maybe Rigol will release scope equivalent to SDS2000X HD, a "HDO4000MSO", and then we could compare head to head and see.

author: dpenev
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: December 15, 2022, 12:27:15 pm
content: Thanks 2N3055, I will study your points.I am after a long time scope investment.So I am OK if HDO4204 become mature for an year.As for the MSO I am using DSLogic USB Logic analyzer.Probably this is of topic but anyone to comment if MSO in SDS2104X HD is more useful compared to DSLogic or equivalent?

author: 2N3055
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 15, 2022, 12:45:04 pm
content: Quote from: dpenev on December 15, 2022, 12:27:15 pmYou're welcome.It is good to see you are realistic about your needs and that you actually have idea of what yo need. There are too many topics where people just come and say "give me best something!" without even knowing what they need.As for MSO vs. separate Logic/protocol analyser, while I'm at it let me throw my 2 cents.In my opinion they are orthogonal, i.e. not really replacement to each other but more of complementary.If you spend lots of time just debugging what messages software sends, separate PC based analyser will be more useful.If you work with devices where you need to see analog signals and digital signals and their correlated timing (and be able to decode messages too) that is domain of MSO.You can sometimes use them interchangeably if you are clever about it. But not always.If you need to capture 5000 decoded messages it will be easier to to do that on big screen on a PC.If you need to decode data from ADC and see if it correlates with analog data on input, you would be better off with a MSO.But in theory, and with less data, MSO scope can do what logic analyser can and some things that it cannot.So in a way it is more universal. Also scopes usually have better triggering (more versatile, with mixed analog/digital/protocol triggering).You could also try to cross trigger scope and LA. That will give you some synchronization, but separated data screens..That can also be used in a pinch...Best,

author: markone
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: December 15, 2022, 03:00:23 pm
content: Quote from: dpenev on December 15, 2022, 10:15:54 amDo you need absolutely 4GS/s, 50 ohms input, more than 100Mpts and probe auto set ?If the answer is NO, consider to buy an HDO1074 at2.5X lessand apply the hack obtaining 200MHz BW and 100Mpts.We are talking about of1000Euro VS2700Euro for HDO4204 or3000for SDS2104X HD, with taxes the difference is well over2000Euro.Maybe this argument could "shape" your requirements

author: dpenev
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: December 15, 2022, 03:55:16 pm
content: Thanks markone,Yes I am aware of this option too and indeed it is also under consideration.Especially after the 2N3055 comment about the 4GS/s

author: richmit
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: February 25, 2023, 05:56:58 pm
content: Quote from: 2N3055 on December 15, 2022, 11:21:36 amI don't quite understand this bit. I think an example might help me most. What is a use case where this impacts what I can do with the scope?Thanx in advance!

author: kripton2035
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 25, 2023, 06:05:57 pm
content: for the MSO, the siglent can in theory be connected to sigrok app on a computerI wasn't able to make it work under ethernet, may be with a usb link this works.so you have the power of the mso and the memory size of the pc.but... again... this needs feedback from users if it is really working or notsigrok has the driver for sds2000 plus.

author: 2N3055
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 25, 2023, 08:56:11 pm
content: Quote from: richmit on February 25, 2023, 05:56:58 pmIt means that if you have a large signal on one channel and small signal on other, large signal might start "bleeding in" to another channel.. How important it is depends on what you do.

author: richmit
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: February 25, 2023, 11:18:57 pm
content: Quote from: 2N3055 on February 25, 2023, 08:56:11 pmAh. I see. Thank you. How big are we talking here? I frequently work with 30Vp-p signals on CH1 & CH2 with 500mV on CH3 with my SDS2k+ without an issue. Would I be able to do that with one of these HDO5K scopes?

author: Martin72
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 26, 2023, 12:08:49 am
content: Quote from: dpenev on December 15, 2022, 10:15:54 amI had the 4204 here for two and a half weeks, returned it last Thursday.And I own a SDS2504X HD...I reported about it in the rigol 4000 and 1000 thread.In that time the scope crashed three times, something is wrong with the acquisition, the plot only knows vector mode, so paints everything always "nicer", the FFT function is buggy and very lean equipped.It has no bode plot function and no LA and the fans make you deaf.The UI is good, but still a bit bumpy, the higher resolution of the display is noticeable.As of now, it is not recommended to buy, but the software still needs a lot of tweaking.If you "need" 4GSa/s and 800Mhz, you have to wait and hope that rigol does not do the same as with other models.The 1000 model is so slimmed down that it can only cite the 12bit as an advantage, compared to similarly priced models like the MSO5000 and the 2000X+.And whether that is really enough to want to have it...

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 26, 2023, 07:19:54 am
content: Message deleted.

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 26, 2023, 07:22:39 am
content: Quote from: Martin72 on February 26, 2023, 12:08:49 amIt has the same screen and UI, which you claim are an advantage.

author: tautech
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 26, 2023, 08:16:40 am
content: Quote from: Fungus on February 26, 2023, 07:19:54 amMaybe you don’t understand what he said in reply #1.Suggest you study it again for deeper understanding.

author: 2N3055
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 26, 2023, 09:20:36 am
content: Quote from: Fungus on February 26, 2023, 07:19:54 amDear Fungus,You seem to misunderstood this or don't understand it well....So let's learn together.ANY scope that exist has a specification called Channel to Channel isolation.It is simply what it says: a measure how much of a signal applied to channel 1 will be seen on other channels on the scope.Which in simple terms means that (with a scope the has this CH2CH isolation at 100:1 , 40dB, for instance) if I apply 10V (P-P) signal on CH1, on CH2 (or 3 or 4 if not specified otherwise) I might get up to 100mV of visible signal bleeding on CH2 from CH1, although nothing is connected to CH2.On a scope that has isolation of 60-70 dB that attenuation factor will be 1000-3000 times attenuated, meaning 10-30 less than other scope. that is more than order of magnitude. (Decibels for voltage are 20 x log... not 10 x log)CH2CH isolation is going to be frequency dependent too, so not all frequencies will bleed the same and it will be less at lower frequencies..Numbers for CH2CH isolation for Rigol are quoted form their own datasheet. And would not be bad for a 8 bit scopebecause there are many 8bit scopes out there that have same order of magnitude CH2CH isolation.You are suggesting that if you use "clever" combination of what channels to use than it would be better.That is not true. Rigol uses both ADC interleaved to achieve 4GS/s. From any single channel. Meaning analog routing to ADCs is running together from all channels to both ADCs in some way. Rigol by itself publishes numbers. They would very gladly claim better if they could. But they don't. And it applies to any channel combination.But some manufacturers (like R&S) have those parameters done better (R&S has expert legacy in RF systems and know this is important and how to do it). SDS2000X HD has CH2CH isolation at the level of R&S which is first class engineering.Unless you have access to DHO4000 and have measured yourself that CH2CH isolation is better than specified, or you have access to some data that proves better, I would stick to Rigol official figures. Maybe the will improve design and will publish better data.. But until then it is what it is. Not what we would like it to be..

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 26, 2023, 11:43:40 am
content: Quote from: 2N3055 on February 26, 2023, 09:20:36 amQuote from: 2N3055 on February 26, 2023, 09:20:36 amOh, they're not separating the ADCs? You could have just said that and saved yourself some typing.In that case I retract what I said. There's probably some variation with combinations of channels but no guarantees. Measurements would have to be made to see how bad it is in practice.I guess it makes sense because they're using the same PCB for the HDO1000 which only has one ADC.

author: Kleinstein
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 26, 2023, 01:19:12 pm
content: The channel to channel separation is usually dependent on the gain settings and the specified values should be an upper limit or the worst case combination. Chances are the a signal the is already attenuated at the input stage has less cross talk than one with a gain setting with less attenuation.The Rigol scope is still quite new and the specs may not be final - e.g. newer PCB versions could improve on things like channel separation or the UI. The channel separation would be one of the points to actually check on real hardware examples - possibly as port of the inital checks for a new scope to make sure it works well enough. It may even vary from unit to unit depending on how good a ground contact of a shield is.Using both ADC combined to get the full 4 Gs/s does not help with the channel saparation from channels 1/2 to 3/4 but there is still the seprate from chanel 1 to 2 that already share the same ADC chip for the most DSOs, including the SDS2104. I don't think the different ADC connections would explain that much difference in the isolation specs. For the isolation there can still be good and bad designs. The Rigol specs look pretty poor, even if looking only the the < 500 MHz range ( the SDS2104 does not support > 500 MHz at all) as it is rare to have a large signal at >500 MHz.The difference in the specs is 60 dB = factor 1000 for the sigilent and 100:1 for the rigol - so a fator of 10 for the comparable specs. Chances are the Rigol will also get better with lower frequency - there is just no separate spec values for 100 MHz or 350 MHz.Much of the channel sepration problem also comes with the probes: for the higher frequency signals on has to connect the ground on both probes and in most use cases one probes a single circuit with a linked ground. So a ground loop is a very common situation.Ideally one would have the channels isolated, at least for the higher frequency part. I wonder if it would make sense to have a clamp on ferrite with the probes.

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 26, 2023, 02:48:23 pm
content: It's also going to depend on whether your probes are in 10x mode or not ... and a dozen other things.Quote from: Kleinstein on February 26, 2023, 01:19:12 pm">100:1" seemsverylow to me. It's far lower than a Rigol DS1054Z or MSO5000 (both are 40dB). It's also a suspiciously round number and it ought to be in decibels.It's almost as if it's a made-up number for the first revision of the manual. That's just speculation though.Can anybody measure one? Just feed a big signal into channel 1 and see if it appears on channel 2.

author: switchabl
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: February 26, 2023, 02:55:02 pm
content: I am not sure what you are trying to say? 100:1 is exactly the same as 40 dB, assuming that this refers to a voltage ratio.

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 26, 2023, 03:01:37 pm
content: Quote from: switchabl on February 26, 2023, 02:55:02 pmOh, duh! I'm thinking of power gain, not voltage gain.One of those days...40dB power gain = 10000:140dB voltage gain = 100:1The point stands though. It seems suspiciously low considering all the effort they put into the rest of the front end.

author: 2N3055
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 26, 2023, 04:14:16 pm
content: Quote from: Fungus on February 26, 2023, 03:01:37 pmIt has to designed to have better isolation. If they kept same front end design philosophy, they might have easily "inherited" same isolation figures.Fact is, isolation is frequency dependent. It can have peaks too.. It won't be at 40dB all the time.But it will at some points and some combination. This is worst case scenario.DHO4000 guarantees that it is no worse than 40 dB (100:1) at any point.SDS2000X HD won't be worse than 60 dB (1000:1) at any point, and no worse than 70dB (3100:1) anywhere below 350MHz.At 10 MHz both probably have CH2CH crosstalk buried in the noise floor...And as to why? Signal integrity is hard work. Simple as that.

author: voltsandjolts
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: February 26, 2023, 04:30:25 pm
content: Quote from: 2N3055 on February 26, 2023, 04:14:16 pmHeh, especially when your designing a high-res scope...nowhere to hide

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 26, 2023, 06:48:46 pm
content: Quote from: 2N3055 on February 26, 2023, 04:14:16 pmAnd "any point" includes 800MHz.Quote from: 2N3055 on February 26, 2023, 04:14:16 pmYep.

author: switchabl
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: February 26, 2023, 07:03:34 pm
content: Quote from: Fungus on February 26, 2023, 06:48:46 pm500 MHz apparently. >500 MHz they only claim 30:1 (~30 dB).

author: 2N3055
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 26, 2023, 07:14:09 pm
content: Quote from: Fungus on February 26, 2023, 06:48:46 pmTo their detriment, specification is same even for 200 MHz version....But they are not only ones that have this spec in this ballpark or worse:Tektronix 2 series MSO Channel to channel isolation 100:1 <= 100 MHz,30:1 > 100 MHzTektronix 3 series MDO Channel-to-channel isolation (typical) Any two channels at equal vertical scale ≥100:1 at ≤100 MHz and≥30:1 at >100 MHzup to the rated bandwidthTektronix 4 Series MSO Crosstalk (channel isolation),typical ≥ 200:1 (46dB) up to the rated bandwidth for any two channelshaving equal Volts/div settings(this is already expensive 12 bit design)Keysight MSOX3104T Channel-to-channel isolation > 100:1 from DC to maximum specified bandwidth of each model (measured with same V/div and coupling on channels) (granted, this is for 1 GHZ BW)R&S RTB2000 and RTM3000 : Channel-to-channel isolation (each channel at same input sensitivity) input frequency < analog bandwidth > 50 dB, so bit better.Siglent SDS6104H12 (Chinese version) has 60 dB up to 200 MHz, 50 dB up to 500 MHz, 40 dB up to 1 GHz.Basically, Rigol isolation is generally speaking not worse than average scope (even from expensive brands). It is only problematic because it is 12 bit design and could actually see crosstalk that 8 bit design might not..Some scopes are much better, and only because they designed it specifically that way, i.e. isolation was included as a factor in design optimization.

author: 2N3055
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 26, 2023, 07:16:46 pm
content: Quote from: switchabl on February 26, 2023, 07:03:34 pmYes thank you for that I got lost in numbers:DHO4000≥100:1 (from DC to 500 MHz), ≥30:1 (＞ 500 MHz to full bandwidth)

author: colorado.rob
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: February 26, 2023, 07:34:37 pm
content: My wish-list items for my next scope are XYZ mode, fast FFT and fast FRA at low (audio) frequencies, and good digital filters for the FFT.

author: Martin72
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 26, 2023, 10:32:54 pm
content: Quote from: Fungus on February 26, 2023, 07:22:39 amYes it is, absolutely.But whether that is enough to make a purchase decision is another question.And what looks better at first glance in the data sheet is not always the better choice.I found that out when I switched from the MSO5000 to the siglent sds2104X+.From a pure comparison of the data, this was a downgrade, but in reality it was exactly the opposite.And so I see it also in the comparison DHO4000 vs SDS2000X HD, at least at the moment, after I had the DHO4204 here for testing.

author: 2N3055
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 26, 2023, 10:56:51 pm
content: Quote from: tautech on February 26, 2023, 07:23:36 pmYeah Rob, stupid me.. a typo... fixed, thanks..