Rigol 2000-S Built-in Function Gen vs Rigol DG4000 - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / testgear

author: Electro Fan
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 02, 2013, 11:29:59 am
content: The Rigol China web site indicates that the function generator built into the forthcoming 2000-S scopes will have 2 channels, support arb, and operate at 25MHz (all of which sounds pretty good) vs. the 60MHz supported by the entry level DG4000.What are the chances that Rigol took subsantially the same function gen features from the DG4000 and buried them inside the 2000-S? Or perhaps they defeatured the DG4000 features - and maybe those will be options to be added back into the S for a price? And perhaps they will sell a function gen bandwidth upgrade as an option? Feature/option packaging and pricing aside, it would seem that in order to duplicate the functionality of a DG4000 insde a 2000-S Rigol would have to make pretty extensive soft menuing buttons to make replicate all the physical buttons and knobs on the DG4000. Any guesses as to how close the built-in functionality and performance might be to the external unit?

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 02, 2013, 12:13:12 pm
content: Unlikely it's capable of better performance, they would have had to keep the price of that feature as low as possible.Agilent got it for almost free because they built the ARB into the main ASIC, and the cost got amortised out. And if you look at say the GW scope, then it's gen is pretty limited because of the cost factor. Rigol would have had the same issues.

author: Electro Fan
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 03, 2013, 11:05:01 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on August 02, 2013, 12:13:12 pmAny chance Rigol did the same thing as Agilent and put the Arb in the main ASIC in the DS/MSO4000?

author: tinhead
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 03, 2013, 11:11:27 am
content: Quote from: Electro Fan on August 03, 2013, 11:05:01 amthere is NO ASIC in Rigol DSO/MSOs.The fact that manufacturer X did implemented something in Y product does not means that manufacturer Z will do similar things and implement W into G only because both did some kind of joint-business together before.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 03, 2013, 11:47:28 am
content: Quote from: Electro Fan on August 03, 2013, 11:05:01 amThere is no ASIC.But yes, they could have implemented in an already existing FPGA. But if they designed it properly they would have be using an optimal size FPGA anyway, so there would likely be little room left, and that means they would have had to use a bigger FPGA costing more per unit, forever. No amortising cost like Agilent get with their ASIC.

author: PA0PBZ
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 03, 2013, 02:50:29 pm
content: I think the AWG in the 2000 series will be an optional pcb, look at the connector on the left and the cutout in the pcb on the right where the 2 output channels are going to be.(Picture from my DS2000 hardware version 2)

author: Electro Fan
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 03, 2013, 10:39:37 pm
content: Quote from: EEVblog on August 03, 2013, 11:47:28 amOh... No ASIC?? Well... Duh...Guess who scanned through the functional reviews but who didn't watch the tear down on the Rigol 2000? (or the tear down on the Agilent 2000 or the tear down on Agilent 3000)? Yesiree, that would be me. But, guess who just watched all three tear downs? Yesiree, that would be me again.Thanks for the heads-up. And based on the tear downs it definitely also looks just like you said - significantly different approaches even though they used to be partner buddies.So, the only other consideration/question (as Dave points out) is that while they clearly didn't hide an Arb in waiting in an ASIC, maybe Rigol could have contemplated it for implementation in a FPGA, but apparently that doesn't seem highly likely. Somehow, someway they are going to get the Arb into the 4000, so back to the original question, any chance it could be substantially similar in features and performance to the DG4000 standalone units? After considering all the info, I'm guessing the internal Arb Function Gen will be A-OK but reasonably well short of the capabilities provided by the DG4000. I guess we'll know a lot more when someone reviews a 2000-S.

author: dougbert
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: October 03, 2013, 03:24:38 am
content: What's the frequency resolution of the Agilent built-in function generator?The DG4000 has a resolution of 1 micro-Hertz, which lets you tune it very very precisely.Doug

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 03, 2013, 03:30:40 am
content: It is likely that the DS1000Z scope function gen is built on the same hardware as the new DG1000Z function gen

author: nowlan
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 03, 2013, 03:52:59 am
content: I didn't think people wanted the built in wave generators. Preference for external boxes.$233 us to upgrade tods104z-s, Built in 2 channels 25MHz waveform Generator(DS1000Z-S)$379 usdg1022, Generators up to 25 MHz (5 MHz max square wave)$551 audDSOX2WAVEGEN, 2000 X-Series offers an integrated 20 MHz function generatorI guess there is money to be saved if your looking at ds104z && dg1007

author: dougbert
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: October 04, 2013, 01:53:32 am
content: Quote from: dougbert on October 03, 2013, 03:24:38 amI checked the Agilent data sheet: The Agilent function generator gives you only 4 decimal places of frequency resolution.That is 1Hkz steps at 10 MHz. The DG4000 has at least 10 decimal places of resolution, even at the highest frequencies.This means, for example, that you could sweep over the passband of a very narrow RF filter. The Agilentfunction generator would be useless for that. In fact, it doesn't even sweep, as far as I can tell.A built-in generator is handy, but it certainly can't do everything a good standalone model can do.Doug