Agilent DSOX2000A series vs Rigol DS2000A series - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / testgear

author: ukee1593
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: January 07, 2014, 12:36:37 am
content: Hi everyone,I'm about to buy a new oscilloscope and had my mind set on the Rigol DS2072A until I noticed the Agilent DSOX2000 series.At the moment I only have a real need for 70MHz in an oscilloscope, but I like the fact that the Rigol is upgradable (either unofficially at the moment, or officially via licence upgrades in the future). But the Agilents offer a few nice things over the Rigols as well.Things which I am unsure about the Agilents;- Educational Pricing; I've heard rumours on these forums that Agilent offers student pricing (a discount of ~ 30% or so). If this is the case it could certainly tip in the favour of the Agilent scopes (As I am a University Student). Has anyone had any success getting educational discounts on Agilent products in Australia?- 2Ch to 4Ch upgrades ... Dave's review of the Agilent DSOX2000 series gave the impression that you could upgrade the 2ch to the 4ch via a software licence, but the pictures I see of the 2 channel scopes don't even have the knobs or BNC connectors for the 4 channels. Can anyone confirm whether the 2 channel is upgradable to the 4 channel?- Waveform updates, Agilent raves about having 50 thousand waveform updates per second. Doesn't the Rigol do this too? The 100Kpoints standard memory in the Agilent seems a little mean compared to Rigol's 14Mpoints.- Signal Generator, Does the Agilent come with this as standard? I wasn't going to bother with the Rigol as a standalone generator could be bought for ~$400 anyway.- Interface, Just from Dave's review the Agilent's interface looked to be more of a pain in the ass than the Rigol due to the extraneous buttons on the scope left over from the DSOX3000 series, and the lack of vertical interface soft keys. I'm sure that the Rigol has plenty of firmware bugs to make up for this difference however. (The Rigol DS1102CAs have a few lock ups and crashes in the University labs)- Overall feel and build, Dave gives both the Agilent and the Rigol top marks for build quality and feel, but is the Agilent noticeably better in any way? I do like the look of the exterior of the Agilent a little more than I like the Rigols, but this is really a minor consideration!Please feel free to add any other noticeable differences between the Agilent DSOX2000 series and Rigol DS2000 series. Perhaps this thread could turn into an updated Rigol vs Agilent Thread for the new Rigol revisions!Thanks everyone!Luke

author: echen1024
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 07, 2014, 01:42:43 am
content: The 2ch is NOT upgradeable to the 4ch. The sig gen is an option, and serial button is now no longer useless, as the 2000 series can do decodes on Agilent. Hope this helps

author: KD0RC
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: February 28, 2014, 12:22:58 am
content: My question is that with the new pricing on the Agilent 2022A (USD 1,572), does it become the top contender? I can't figure out if the smaller memory of the Agilent makes the Rigol better for the price or not...

author: echen1024
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 28, 2014, 01:39:04 am
content: Agilent's scopes are based on the ASIC, so memory is significantly faster, and the scope feels MUCH more responsive when using. Rigol offers a lot of memory, but it's slow memory.

author: KD0RC
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: February 28, 2014, 03:46:43 am
content: Thanks for the insight echen1024. The specs are one thing, but the user experience with the gear can be something else. What is the sacrifice with only 100Kpts of memory compared with 14Mpts? Is it really just the ability to capture more of the waveform and analyze it later, or is there more to it than that?Len

author: echen1024
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 28, 2014, 04:58:22 am
content: Quote from: KD0RC on February 28, 2014, 03:46:43 amWell, you can capture much, much more with 14Mpts, which is helpful for things like decoding a serial bus that transmits packets. Also, the Agilent 2k memory can be upgraded to 1M now. Something interesting to note is that Agilent's ASIC does the serial decode in hardware, while Rigol does it in software, and the usability is world's apart, and the Rigol screws up sometimes as well. I believe Agilent supports segmented memory in decodes, which almost negates the need for a large amount of memory, as the Rigol does not.

author: jpb
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 28, 2014, 01:18:22 pm
content: Quote from: ukee1593 on January 07, 2014, 12:36:37 amIn the UK, on AWG rather than scopes, I was quoted an education discount of 15% - but I am an post-doc rather than a student so it may be different. The easiest way to find out is just contact an Agilent rep and ask for a quote (stating that you're a student looking for a discount). The discount may be for the university rather than the individual but I was quite open about it being an individual purchase for a home lab so I think they can be flexible.

author: KD0RC
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: February 28, 2014, 11:06:18 pm
content: Cost of the Agilent came down to USD 1,572, so it is very comparable to the Rigol now. I am seriously thinking about getting it. After I use it for a while (hobby use...) I can decide if the USD 200 additional for the 1Mpt memory upgrade is worth it or not.

author: echen1024
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 28, 2014, 11:12:48 pm
content: Quote from: KD0RC on February 28, 2014, 11:06:18 pmI would suggest 4 channels. Like a 2014 for the price of a 2004.

author: KD0RC
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: March 02, 2014, 05:03:24 pm
content: I found an interesting video on the Agilent memory upgrade that answers my earlier question. I was thinking only in terms of captured waveforms for later analysis and not scope performance. Martin Lorton (mjlorton on You Tube) shows some very cool performance numbers before and after his 1 Mpts upgrade. The real value of the increased memory is that the sample rate is orders of magnitude better at the slower time bases. Here is a link to Martin's video showing the performance comparison. If (when?) I get the Agilent, I will certainly get the memory upgrade.http://youtu.be/Dts-9nRH87s

author: echen1024
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 02, 2014, 05:40:53 pm
content: Quote from: KD0RC on March 02, 2014, 05:03:24 pmIf you can afford it, Agilent are running a special where for the cost of one option, you receive all of them free.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: March 02, 2014, 08:04:20 pm
content: Quote from: ukee1593 on January 07, 2014, 12:36:37 amQuoteNo, you have to buy the 4 CH up front.QuoteIt WAS a big deal 3 years ago when it was released, now others are doing it. I think it's 100K/sec now?QuoteNo, you have to get a deal or buy it.QuoteMinor thing, don't worry about it.

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 02, 2014, 08:15:19 pm
content: There is no search function at Rigol scopes. A 14Mpoints memory without search capability is not much useful. Agilent offers search for serial decoded data at DSOX2000.

author: Senf
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: March 03, 2014, 02:10:22 am
content: I have both scopes and I can ensure you, you can't go wrong on either.If you'd ever need 4 channels, you can not upgrade any of them, so that would be your most important decision upfront.The pros and cons on both are mere details, there is no showstopper or killer feature on anyone - unless of course you'd be looking for one particular must-have, e.g. the large memory of the Rigol or the Wavegen on the Agilent. But then you wouldn't seek advice anymore?If I had to give up one of them, I couldn't decide...so, I'm glad I don't have toTechspecs have been discussed already and you can look em all up, so I'll just add my personal little(!) pros and cons:Rigol:+Large memory+Better user interface (more softbuttons=less menu fiddling)+Tons of features, even in the basic version (e.g. the statistic plots are great, i think the Agilent doesnt have that at all?)+Probes seem better build quality than the Agilents+Analog frontend less noisy-Fan is more noisy though-Button illumination is rather dim-Whole front panel looks a tad too chinese...like in "cheap and colorfull"Agilent:+Wavegen comes in handy at times+Love the probe compartment+Fan is rather on the quite side+Overall built quality, look and feel, the better button illumination...it just makes it more enjoyable to work with.-The probes though, they feel somewhat cheap and clunky (the "hook" looks like a bent paperclip)++Professional support: Had to do some SCPI programming for a customer project. All the drivers, the documentation, just everything you might need is right there on the website. Email questions get answered right away, they even gave me phone numbers to call in case of any problems. Also the distributor always lends a unit or has replacements available, should yours have to go for repair or whatever.With my Rigol, I am not so sure about that. For basement use only though, I wouldnt care at all.They both have this analog-like waveform display (not just pixels in a single line, but gradients that cover the whole range of the signal) which to me is one of the most important features and they both seem to be doing a pretty good job on that (my analog scope is just collecting dust now). Neither of them feels slow or awkward to use, they are very responsive and I never had any crashes or hangs (except with the Agilent when it didnt like some SCPI stuff I sent to it).To sum it up, the Rigol sure offers more bang for the buck when you just tick off a list of features in the unit. On the other hand the whole Agilent infrastructure is absolutley priceless should you ever need it.Whichever you pick, you'll love it, no doubt

author: KD0RC
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: March 03, 2014, 02:38:19 am
content: Thanks for your insights, Senf. I decided on and ordered the Agilent DSOX 2022A today. One deciding factor was the 'light up all the options for the price of one' that is announced for April availability. Since the memory upgrade is included that I would have bought anyway, it really made sense for me to take this route. I have never had a good signal generator before, so that is a real bonus for me. Do you know offhand how long the 'try it before you buy it' licenses are for? Even though I am sure that I will get them, it would be nice to take everything for a spin first.

author: Senf
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: March 03, 2014, 02:46:18 am
content: Yeah, the trial-license lasts for 30 days and they are not pre-activated, so you can get to know your scope first and then activate the trial later.On top of that, you can get an additional 30 day trial code for each individual function.Oh, and congratulations on your new puppy

author: echen1024
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 03, 2014, 02:58:01 am
content: Quote from: KD0RC on March 03, 2014, 02:38:19 amI think that for the price you paid, the 2004 with the bandwidth upgrade is a better choice due to the fact that 4 channels is much more useful than slightly higher bandwidth.

author: KD0RC
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: March 03, 2014, 03:10:57 am
content: Quote from: Senf on March 03, 2014, 02:46:18 amThanks Senf, that sounds very cool! That will also allow my credit card to cool off a bit before dropping another $500 US...Quote from: echen1024 on March 03, 2014, 02:58:01 amWell, that is a pretty big statement to make without knowing my requirements for the scope... For me, the additional $643 for the extra two channels (nearly half again as much as the 2 channel price) is not value add. For some folks it certainly would be the way to go.

author: echen1024
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 03, 2014, 03:30:59 am
content: Quote from: KD0RC on March 03, 2014, 03:10:57 amWell, it always depends on your purpose. I feel 2 more channels is better, you might feel more bandwidth is better. Your call, but I would kill to have any Agilent 2000X series.

author: Mark_O
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: March 03, 2014, 07:09:06 am
content: Quote from: Hydrawerk on March 02, 2014, 08:15:19 pmThat is correct, for continuous acquisitions. Though for Segmented captures, the post-analysis function can do a pretty powerful job of locating things you may find interesting (deviations from either a template waveform, or a mask). Neither of which is available on the X2000, at any price.QuoteWell, it'salwaysuseful for providing more sample resolution, and enabling higher sample rates for the same time duration. That's what KD0RC was referring to above, in Martin's video. Having 10x the memory directly enables maintaining 10x the sample rate, for the given time window. OTOH, if that 14M is being used to acquire lots of waveforms in one stream, then I agree with you that its value is seriously diminished by the lack of any mechanism to move through it in a meaningful way.QuoteYes, butonlyfor serial data (and only if you've bought that option). Otherwise the Search button does nothing at all! The DSO-X3000 and up provide searching on analog waveform characteristics. Of course, with only 100K samples on the X2000, that's not much of a handicap. Expanded to 1M and you might be wishing Search on the X2000 was more capable.It's great that Agilent is offering all options for one package price now. The way it has been, they split off many functions as options, and the cost added up rapidly. Mask Testing--Option. 'Deep' Memory(1M)--Option. Segmented Captures--Option. (And I had to laugh... "Capture up to 25 successive waveform segments". Wow! Unless you get the expanded memory, then it's a whopping 250 segments.) Things that come standard on the cheapest Rigol were all extra $$ options. That was a smart move on Agilent's part, and will keep them competitive a bit longer.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: March 03, 2014, 07:13:11 am
content: Quote from: KD0RC on March 03, 2014, 03:10:57 amYou can buy a 4CH Rigol 1000Z for less than that! That would give you 6 channels, or 5 channels if you synced the triggering.Puts it into perspective...

author: Mark_O
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: March 03, 2014, 07:33:28 am
content: Quote from: Senf on March 03, 2014, 02:46:18 amYeah, both Rigol and Siglent could learn something there. By the time many get past the core functions, and around to exploring the fancy options, they've already expired.

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 03, 2014, 11:11:19 pm
content: Yes, when compared to Tektronix or Rigol, Agilent has rather small acquisition memory. Then probably everybody knows that most Agilent scopes (including DSOX2000 or 3000) have vertical sensitivity 4mV/div. (It can be set down to 1mV/div, but then it is only a digital magnification.) :-( :-(

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 03, 2014, 11:12:52 pm
content: Quote from: Senf on March 03, 2014, 02:10:22 amSome Rigol scopes also have wavevorm generator today.

author: KD0RC
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: March 03, 2014, 11:40:36 pm
content: Quote from: EEVblog on March 03, 2014, 07:13:11 amIndeed!

author: echen1024
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 04, 2014, 01:49:12 am
content: Really, assuming a 30% discount off list price, the 2004 and 2012 have a price delta of around 200 dollars.

author: Sparky
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: March 04, 2014, 03:32:10 am
content: Quote from: echen1024 on March 04, 2014, 01:49:12 amHmm...I think your calculation is a bit off.KD0RCgot the Agilent DSOX2022A, which given the current promotion is priced as the DSOX2012A ($1572). The DSOX2004A is the bottom rung 4ch version --- there's no promotion on it --- priced at $1916. That's $344 more, for 2 additional channels at the expense of a lower 70MHz BW.As Dave pointed out, four 70MHz channels (Rigol DS1074Z) could be got just $206 more (using 6% discount on Tequipment) than getting the DSOX2004A, and he'd have totally 2x 200MHz channels and 4x 70MHz channels!KD0RC, I think you made the right choice --- the bandwidth upgrade is a very good value; I also took advantage of it and ordered an Agilent recently.

author: Mark_O
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: March 04, 2014, 03:40:16 am
content: Quote from: Hydrawerk on March 03, 2014, 11:11:19 pmYes, their 'Achilles heel'.QuoteThanks! I knew about the X2000, but wasn't aware that the X3000 had that limitation. That's kindacheesydisappointing (seeing a 1mV/div spec, and having to read the fine print to discover... not so much). Moral: always RTFP.

author: echen1024
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 04, 2014, 04:00:43 am
content: Quote from: Sparky on March 04, 2014, 03:32:10 amSorry, my mistake. I assumed that he received the edu discount.

author: KD0RC
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: March 04, 2014, 04:23:37 am
content: Quote from: Sparky on March 04, 2014, 03:32:10 amThanks Sparky, It is due to arrive this Thursday - I can't wait... I ordered it from TestEquity and they were right on the ball getting it shipped quickly. They were very pleasant on the phone which I appreciate as well.We are all looking for the very best in gear, but it is always a trade off - Price, percieved quality, speed, accuracy, features, etc. What is critical to one person is no biggie to another. Compared to my Tek 2213 and a little PC-based scope, the new one will feel like a million bucks...

author: echen1024
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 04, 2014, 04:24:56 am
content: Quote from: KD0RC on March 04, 2014, 04:23:37 amThat's how I felt going from no scope to a real shitty Siglent, and agin to a Rigol DS1074Z. Lucky arse with your new Agilent.