Instek GDS2202a vs Rigol DS2202 - any Opinions? - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / testgear

author: jstarr
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: May 13, 2013, 07:40:58 pm
content: The Instek GDS-2000 seem to offer a lot of scope for the price. Anyone have any experience yet? I came across it searching for scopes of this class that still offer independent (alternate) channel triggering and the GDS-2202a has it.john

author: Yaksaredabomb
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: May 13, 2013, 08:04:05 pm
content: Marmad (among others) brought up the GDS-2000A series as a suggestion in my own search and laid out a few points in its favor. He links to another thread with a video by grego that's pretty interesting. I'm on the lookout for more videos and posts from grego. I'm sure Dave's crazy busy but I'm very much looking forward to his own review when he gets a chance, too.Quote from: marmad on May 11, 2013, 01:26:42 am

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 13, 2013, 08:09:52 pm
content: I know I keep saying this (about more videos) but I'm working on it! As time permits....The GDS does do alternate triggering but it looks like the wfm/s rate drops fairly dramatically. Not that that's really an issue since, well, you're using alternate triggering so you should expect it to drop.Overall I've been enjoying it - it's easy to use, the response from Instek has been fantastic to issues I've brought up, they've been releasing firmware updates about every 3-4 weeks right now which you can take two ways: a) they have a lot of bugs or b) they are resolving them as quickly as they can. I prefer "b" but having dropped $1700 on this thing I may be a bit biased.If you can I'd jump to the 2204 instead as you can't upgrade that later (4 channels vs 2). Not critical but in for a penny, in for a pound kind of thing.-Greg

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 13, 2013, 08:23:03 pm
content: Wait for a few months before the Rigol DS2000-S is released.https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/new-rigol-ds2000-s-series-with-built-in-dual-channel-25-mhz-awg/It looks very interesting.

author: jstarr
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: May 13, 2013, 09:00:02 pm
content: Greg, Can you tell me how the alternate triggering works with 3 or 4 very different signals?j

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 13, 2013, 09:31:17 pm
content: I think that the scope can use only one timebase.

author: jstarr
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: May 13, 2013, 09:41:49 pm
content: Yes one timebase but I believe it has alternate triggering and will display different sine signals all sync'ed simultaneouslyj

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 13, 2013, 10:43:35 pm
content: Yes, it has alternate trigger, look into the user manual.

author: Salas
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 14, 2013, 12:20:32 am
content: Quote from: grego on May 13, 2013, 08:09:52 pmHey, nice video! The screen quality of your scope beats the shit out my Rigol DS2000's weak screen. Nice purchase, congrats. I am happy with my AFG-2000 series generator also, very stable.

author: Electro Fan
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 14, 2013, 12:22:05 am
content: Quote from: grego on May 13, 2013, 08:09:52 pmGreg, Based on what you have described I am definitely going with "b"; GW Instek seems like they are the most attentive of all the manufacturers mentioned here. I'm sure Rigol, and Agilent, and Tektronix, and others are doing a great job behind the scenes but your description of how they listen to your input, how they make decisions and commitments and communicate their roadmap, and how they follow through with bug and feature releases is IMPRESSIVE!

author: Electro Fan
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 14, 2013, 12:24:57 am
content: Quote from: Salas on May 14, 2013, 12:20:32 amI like the Instek screen quality but why are so sure it beats the _ _ _ _ out of the Rigol DS2000 screen? Thx

author: Salas
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 14, 2013, 01:02:49 am
content: Because I have my Rigol right in front of me as we post and its weak and soft. It even darkens the graticule matrix if I move my head level to it. Luckily I watch it from above. Many guys needing the scope on a shelf above eye level, and it will darken out even more. I love the scope but the screen is cheap crap and it does not adorn it at all. The cooling fan could be less noisy too. Its how a tool feels for long work as important as it performs some times. The Instek shines its screen quality on the video, easy to see.

author: Electro Fan
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 14, 2013, 01:13:03 am
content: Quote from: Salas on May 14, 2013, 01:02:49 amThanks Salas for the candid input. Maybe somehow your particular screen has an issue? I don't think we've heard the same type/level of concern from other users, but maybe I've missed it. Maybe Marmad or others can share their observations?

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 14, 2013, 01:15:39 am
content: Quote from: Electro Fan on May 14, 2013, 12:22:05 amTo be clear if you're US based the support has been great. I can't speak for any other countries (nor would I).On a side note I'm still waiting for the firmware update that includes CAN decode on the LA (which has been promised but not quite sure when) but they have been quick about getting back to me on various issues I bring up (usually I communicate about once a week with them right now).The angle on the screen is pretty good - I can go past 30-40 degrees and can still see it pretty clearly. Maybe I'll do a quick video showing that.

author: Salas
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 14, 2013, 01:24:08 am
content: Quote from: Electro Fan on May 14, 2013, 01:13:03 amNo its normal. I had the 1052E too and I never complained. I don't say its useless, I say its compromised. When I got the scope I got it for all its myriad good points, well the screen ain't one of its strengths. If it had a strong bright display with good viewing angles the intensity grading would have been much more fascinating too.

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 14, 2013, 01:25:33 am
content: Well, even Dave said that the Rigol's screen is quite dim but that should not be a big issue.Maybe he said it somewhere else.I like the screen of GDS-2000A.https://plus.google.com/photos/106264218831814439783/albums/5857196858625060337/5857197091319878914But there is onlyone year warrantyon the LCD. Oh why? See it in the scope datasheet!

author: Electro Fan
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 14, 2013, 01:28:14 am
content: Quote from: grego on May 14, 2013, 01:15:39 amOk, more screen stuff would be good, but how about a LA demo showing some digital signals synchronized with some analog signals

author: Salas
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 14, 2013, 01:50:09 am
content: Quote from: Hydrawerk on May 14, 2013, 01:25:33 amIts about quality not "issue" per se. Look in what I found here, some video showing the Instek when displaying modulations for 2 minutes between 2:00 to 4:00 on the video time bar.One having an Agilent 2000X or 3000X will maybe just notice its a reflective VS absorptive screen choice preference matter. One having a Rigol DS2000 will notice his screen is simply pale & dim. Or he does not care for such stuff so its fine, no bother. To me, when talking a visual tool like a scope is, we should evaluate its visual quality among its prime characteristics.

author: Electro Fan
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 14, 2013, 03:28:53 am
content: Quote from: Salas on May 14, 2013, 01:50:09 amOk, Agreed - visual quality should be considered one of the prime characteristics of a scope.

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 14, 2013, 02:11:20 pm
content: The LCD of my DSOX2002A is bright and overall OK, but maybe a bit obsolete. It has probably CCFL backlight, i don't know why...Nevermind, my LG 17" LCD display of my PC was made in 2006 and it's still OK even with CCFL.

author: rbola35618
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 14, 2013, 03:31:38 pm
content: When I evaluated the Rigol's DS4054 scope, I did noticed that the screen was not as bright as the my Rigol DS1052E. A way to see how good a screen is, is to display composite video signal from a camera. Video signal is complex and has both digital and analog signal and is a good test the persistence or grading of a scope. I noticed that the DS4054 did not display the grading as well as the Agilent DSOX 3000.Perphap somebody can connect a video signal to the Instek scope to see how well it does displaying a video signal.

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 14, 2013, 05:18:11 pm
content: I'm uploading a video now with a modulated waveform showing persistence. I also pan the camera at different angles to the screen so you can get an idea of its brightness and accurate angles.Video uploaded:

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 14, 2013, 06:34:08 pm
content: Quote from: Salas on May 14, 2013, 01:02:49 amI totally disagree with this; I don't have any problems whatsoever with the screen at all. I use it both day and night in a giant room full of massive windows and tons of daylight. Maybe you have a bad backlight or something?

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 14, 2013, 06:37:41 pm
content: Quote from: rbola35618 on May 14, 2013, 03:31:38 pmWell, it would make sense that a DSO with 1M wfrm/s would display the gradient slightly better than 100k wfrm/s, no?

author: Salas
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 14, 2013, 06:44:44 pm
content: Quote from: grego on May 14, 2013, 05:18:11 pmInformative, thanx.Not high shelf friendly, same as the Rigol.Very nice brightness and contrast from level and above though.Still the Rigol has good left and right angles too. Graphics, menus, and buttons functions are rich and elegant on the Rigol. A very nice scope to use and look at. The Instek seems a bit underdeveloped in those respects, surely it takes hands on experience with both to really say which one is the more effective and intuitive.

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 14, 2013, 06:57:18 pm
content: Quote from: jstarr on May 13, 2013, 07:40:58 pmAs I've written elsewhere, I think the Rigol DS2000 isdefinitelya better deal than the GW-Instek GDS-2000A2-channelscopes:The Rigol has a low-noise front-end with real vertical sensitivity down to 500 µV/div.The Rigol has 14MB sample memory (56MB optional) and an extra 100MB segment memory standard.The Rigol has standard triggers: Edge, Pulse, Pattern, Video, Runt, Slope, Setup/Hold, RS232/UART, I²C, SPIThe Rigol has Parallel decoding standardThe Rigol has high resolution mode (12 bits) when timebase >=5 µs/div.The Rigol has 350MHz 10:1 probes and LAN connection standard.Now, the GW-Instek GDS-2000A4-channelversion is a different story, and perhaps the best bang-for-buck (at the moment) for 4-channels.

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 14, 2013, 07:03:03 pm
content: Quote from: marmad on May 14, 2013, 06:57:18 pmAssuming you don't want/need any expandability (MSO option, waveform gen, etc) I'd concur with that. Then again with the Instek, just like the Agilent, you pay a bit more for the ability to have a 4 channel scope. Not that you can upgrade it later, but it's identical otherwise. The 2000 and 4000 Rigols are completely different.I will nitpick and say that the fact that the Rigol has 350Mhz probes standard is a "who cares" kind of thing - as long as your probes are rated for your scope the different is negligible. Standard LAN connection is something I wish I had though, I will freely admit that. The hi-res is on the firmware roadmap (e.g. who knows when it'll arrive) and the Rigol crushes the Instek in memory depth. Too bad you can't search it. ;-)But yeah - if someone wants a high quality 2 channel scope you would be EXTREMELY hard pressed to beat the Rigol 2000 series in pretty much every category except expansion. Bang for buck is huge on that thing.

author: Salas
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 14, 2013, 07:04:46 pm
content: Quote from: marmad on May 14, 2013, 06:34:08 pmNo adverse ambient conditions in my room or any suspicion for my scope's screen condition. Looks exactly as in Dave's videos. Its just a washed out screen compared to the rich display of some vivid scopes in my view. And it would be welcome if better but not a party stopper either. Up to anybody's priority list.

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 14, 2013, 07:12:36 pm
content: Quote from: Salas on May 14, 2013, 07:04:46 pmI guess it's a subjective perceptual thing connected to you then, because I haven't heard anyone else claiming that the screen was 'cheap crap'.

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 14, 2013, 07:18:59 pm
content: Quote from: grego on May 14, 2013, 07:03:03 pmWell, it's helpful for when Rigol starts selling BW upgrades for the DS2000 that you have probes that can handle well past 200MHz

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 14, 2013, 07:30:58 pm
content: Quote from: jstarr on May 13, 2013, 07:40:58 pmJohn,As I posted elsewhere, while the Rigol DS2000 doesn't have the ALT trigger mode, it has many other complex triggers - one of which is called Delay- that can use both CH1 and CH2 as the trigger source - each on it's own edge, with < / > / <> / >< delay parameters with a large time range. So it's quite easy to set up the scope to display stable waveforms with unsynced signals (as in the attached image - both waveforms were perfectly stable). This would work in many situations where you might normally use ALT trigger.Mark

author: rbola35618
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 14, 2013, 07:45:42 pm
content: I agree with Salas, the Rigol seems to be more dim for my preference. That was my major complaint I had about it. I guess my old eyes need a brighter screen.I still wish Grego would connect a video signal to see how the display looks and look at both at Vertical speed 60 Hz Horizontal speed 15734 Hz.RB

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 14, 2013, 08:01:11 pm
content: Quote from: rbola35618 on May 14, 2013, 07:45:42 pmI'll see what I can do - I've never done it before as I normally work in the digital realm but there's a first time for everything, right?

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 14, 2013, 08:22:41 pm
content: Quote from: grego on May 14, 2013, 07:03:03 pmThat's it. For such a large 14MB per channel memory there should be a place mark, search and scroll function. As Wave Inspector on Tektronix or similar features on GW Instek or even Hameg.

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 14, 2013, 08:45:44 pm
content: Quote from: Hydrawerk on May 14, 2013, 08:22:41 pmTrue. OTOH, if you ask me whether I'd rather have (while in NORMAL mode) 7MB or 28MB per channel (versus 500k on the Instek) -OR- a marker and search routine for the memory - I'd have to go with the larger memory. Because you can always write software that implements a search routine (which is exactly what I'm doing): since youhave to stopthe DSO to search the memory, it's all post-processing. But you can never physically add more memory to your DSO.

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 14, 2013, 09:22:47 pm
content: Well, even the expensive DSOX3000 has only 2Mpoints per channel (probably). It has a search function, but you cannot place marks manually.http://cp.literature.agilent.com/litweb/pdf/5990-6619EN.pdfWhat's the purpose of theDSOX3MEMUPanyway?? There must be a mistake?

author: Yaksaredabomb
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: May 26, 2013, 06:40:05 am
content: Quote from: grego on May 14, 2013, 05:18:11 pmHi grego - thanks again for posting those videos! I know life "gets in the way" (and it should), but if you find time to post any more that would be cool. Doesn't have to be polished or anything - could even be just random tinkering or using it with whatever project you happen to be working on that minute so it doesn't take much time for you.One idea would be messing around with a video signal and intensity grading (I don't have much interest there but someone mentioned it I think). Also, it would be interesting to see those 600 rows of pixels put to work with the logic analyzer - if you get to it.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 26, 2013, 07:30:44 am
content: Quote from: marmad on May 14, 2013, 08:45:44 pmMe too. Memory depth wins hands down every time.Having briefly played with the GDS-2000A, I was not that impressed. Whereas the Rigol I was instantly impressed out of the box.I have not found anything compelling on the Instek yet to recommend it over the Rigol, but that may change with use.

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 26, 2013, 08:44:09 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on May 26, 2013, 07:30:44 amWell, sorry to hear that on one hand - OTOH, it's probably good for Rigol.Idothink Rigol made a clever choice by blasting by everyone else in terms of memory depths offered (even going so far as to having extra, dedicated, segment memory - a full 64MB on the DS2000). As with PCs, once you have all that memory for up to 65000 segments - or for maintaining the 2GSa/s rate down to the 2ms/div. time base setting - it's hard to go back