Siglent SDS3000X HD and upgraded SDS1000X HD

[ebastler]

does it have the same double pixel behavior in fft mode?

No, all Math functions (including FFT) are rendered at the full vertical resolution. Only traces from the physical channels are limited to the double-pixels.

[2N3055]

This is not a limitation, it's just an aesthetic issue. I'm using the scope very well.

Of course it is a (technical) limitation: The scope is not able to make full use of its screen resolution when rendering traces.

Whether you feel that it is affecting your use of the scope is another matter. As I have said before, I personally find it acceptable on the SDS800X HD -- but consider it a poor design tradeoff for the SDS1000X HD, where Siglent charges a heavy markup for the larger screen (and 50 Ohm intputs).

i wanted to pay an extra if the 1000hd had not the blobby pixels. 2000hd is too expensive & not justified for my usage.
maybe i can live with the 512x300 resolution... my old tektronix is 320x240
does it have the same double pixel behavior in fft mode?

You should make an effort and try SDS1000xHD yourself.
It's good chance you will not notice the pixels at all.
When you are measuring signals, there is always more than one pixel width of noise.
Scope is not 512x300 resolution. Only trace is double pixel. And that is already much thinner trace than on any old 8 bit scope.

When pedants talk about his they usually have to show you 2-4X times magnified images to be able to explain people what they mean.
It is technically there, but in practice you wouldn't know it if nobody told you about it.
People only noticed it when they were looking into captured screen images on a PC.

So if you can, try it and decide for yourself.

It is still best scope for the money. On SDS800xHD, I feel screen is small for me (bad eyes..) and I miss 50Ω inputs occasionally. Basically if I went for 1000xHD it would be just right.

If you don't need 12 bit, there is also an option of SDS2000X-Plus. It is a 500MHz scope design and very powerful in its own right. It is also 10" touch screen, 50Ω inputs, and higher sample rate in 4ch mode....

Both are quantum leap to your old scope. SDS800xHD is too...

[skander36]

...

When pedants talk about his they usually have to show you 2-4X times magnified images to be able to explain people what they mean.
It is technically there, but in practice you wouldn't know it if nobody told you about it.
People only noticed it when they were looking into captured screen images on a PC.
...

True, and if try to zoom on the scope screen you get this, and this is excellent in my opinion.

[KungFuJosh]

That zoom looks great. It looks less great when zoomed on the computer, but anything does when zoomed past its captured resolution.

[2N3055]

That zoom looks great. It looks less great when zoomed on the computer, but anything does when zoomed past its captured resolution.

That is my point.

[ebastler]

When pedants talk about his they usually have to show you 2-4X times magnified images to be able to explain people what they mean.
It is technically there, but in practice you wouldn't know it if nobody told you about it.
People only noticed it when they were looking into captured screen images on a PC.

Why would you say that, after Martin72 just shared screenshots which show the very obvious steps on a ramp signal without any magnification? https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/siglent-sds3000x-hd-and-upgraded-sds1000x-hd/msg5504758/#msg5504758

And why do you see the need to defame users who criticize this aspect of the SDS800/1000X HD as "pedants"? Can't you just accept the fact that even Siglent products might have some weaknesses, and that it is ok to write about these? They are still great scopes. Well, the 800 is; I am less convinced that the 1000 strikes the right balance.

if try to zoom on the scope screen you get this, and this is excellent in my opinion.

That's a very valid point. Nobody is debating that the entry-level HD scopes are "proper" 12 bit scopes, and that you do get value from the ADC resolution via the vertical zoom feature. (Which is integrated into the scope UI very nicely indeed!)

[2N3055]

When pedants talk about his they usually have to show you 2-4X times magnified images to be able to explain people what they mean.
It is technically there, but in practice you wouldn't know it if nobody told you about it.
People only noticed it when they were looking into captured screen images on a PC.

Why would you say that, after Martin72 just shared screenshots which show the very obvious steps on a ramp signal without any magnification? https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/siglent-sds3000x-hd-and-upgraded-sds1000x-hd/msg5504758/#msg5504758

And why do you see the need to defame users who criticize this aspect of the SDS800/1000X HD as "pedants"? Can't you just accept the fact that even Siglent products might have some weaknesses, and that it is ok to write about these? They are still great scopes. Well, the 800 is; I am less convinced that the 1000 strikes the right balance.

if try to zoom on the scope screen you get this, and this is excellent in my opinion.

That's a very valid point. Nobody is debating that the entry-level HD scopes are "proper" 12 bit scopes, and that you do get value from the ADC resolution via the vertical zoom feature. (Which is integrated into the scope UI very nicely indeed!)

Because there must heard other opinions than yours.

A person that actually owns a scope tells you that he doesn't mind it but you keep talking about it like it is important. It is important only to your OCD obsession.
You don't even own a scope and somehow your opinion is more important than real experience of real users.

And while I don't want to change you and stop you from repeating ad nauseam your pet peeve, no matter how boring it is by now, you certainly won't tell me or anybody else what we are allowed to say.

Every time you post your OPINON how you think this is important, I will post my opinion how it is irrelevant to actual use and utility of the scope...
Welcome to right of free speech.

[ebastler]

You don't even own a scope and somehow your opinion is more important than real experience of real users.

I own the SDS800X HD, and for some signals find the limited vertical resolution quite noticeable even on its small screen. For not-so-steep slopes for example, and the settling phase of square waves.

Every time you post your OPINON how you think this is important, I will post my opinion how it is irrelevant to actual use and utility of the scope...
Welcome to right of free speech.

I have no issue with you voicing your opinion, but found the "pedant" label quite unnecessary. I don't call you a "fanboy" either.

[le_yum]

This is not a limitation, it's just an aesthetic issue. I'm using the scope very well.

Of course it is a (technical) limitation: The scope is not able to make full use of its screen resolution when rendering traces.

Whether you feel that it is affecting your use of the scope is another matter. As I have said before, I personally find it acceptable on the SDS800X HD -- but consider it a poor design tradeoff for the SDS1000X HD, where Siglent charges a heavy markup for the larger screen (and 50 Ohm intputs).

i wanted to pay an extra if the 1000hd had not the blobby pixels. 2000hd is too expensive & not justified for my usage.
maybe i can live with the 512x300 resolution... my old tektronix is 320x240
does it have the same double pixel behavior in fft mode?

You should make an effort and try SDS1000xHD yourself.
It's good chance you will not notice the pixels at all.
When you are measuring signals, there is always more than one pixel width of noise.
Scope is not 512x300 resolution. Only trace is double pixel. And that is already much thinner trace than on any old 8 bit scope.

When pedants talk about his they usually have to show you 2-4X times magnified images to be able to explain people what they mean.
It is technically there, but in practice you wouldn't know it if nobody told you about it.
People only noticed it when they were looking into captured screen images on a PC.

So if you can, try it and decide for yourself.

It is still best scope for the money. On SDS800xHD, I feel screen is small for me (bad eyes..) and I miss 50Ω inputs occasionally. Basically if I went for 1000xHD it would be just right.

If you don't need 12 bit, there is also an option of SDS2000X-Plus. It is a 500MHz scope design and very powerful in its own right. It is also 10" touch screen, 50Ω inputs, and higher sample rate in 4ch mode....

Both are quantum leap to your old scope. SDS800xHD is too...

there is the pcim trade fair at nurenbreg on 11-13/6, i seen siglent is present, i hope i can play with the different models there!

[2N3055]

there is the pcim trade fair at nurenbreg on 11-13/6, i seen siglent is present, i hope i can play with the different models there!

That is excellent! Go and try, and not only Siglent.  And then decide for your self. Have fun.

[2N3055]

I have no issue with you voicing your opinion, but found the "pedant" label quite unnecessary. I don't call you a "fanboy" either.

Because I am not a fanboy. And you are a bit "detail oriented"....

And that is not meant as an insult by no means.
If you were my neurosurgeon I would really appreciate you to be VERY pedantic....

I also do appreciate that it bothers you. I get that. But you should accept that it does not bother me. Not because I'm a fanboy, because when I use the scope I think about other things and don't analyse rendering quality. I accept there is some "stepping" as pixelation is a thing. And as I said, when working on real time signals there is enough noise so it all "blends" enough I don't notice.
Would I mind it to be same as on 2000xHD? No of course not, better is better.
But it is barely noticeable and I can use this very powerful little scope to do some really fancy work.

And so you don't "fanboy" me again, I do have a critique of SDS800xHD. For me screen is small, my eyesight is not good,...
Not resolution, but physical size of screen, and scaling that goes with it.
But if kept on a desk close to me it is OK. Although that is class of scope problem, not Siglent specific.

In fact it boots so fast it would be my first scope to boot and for 80% of quick checkups it would do the job.
It is so small it is like a multimeter on your desk that you keep handy.

But I don't do it. I find it acoustically loud. Not crazy loud, but I got spoiled by 2000xHD that is whisper quiet.
I guess my ears are not much better than my eyes...
If I wanted for Siglent to redesign something on that scope that would be airflow/acoustic design.

I don't have SDS1000xHD and didn't try it, but if that one is 2000xHD quiet that would be awesome.
Maybe Skander36 could give a comment on acoustic signature...

[skander36]

...
I don't have SDS1000xHD and didn't try it, but if that one is 2000xHD quiet that would be awesome.
Maybe Skander36 could give a comment on acoustic signature...

It is not as quiet as 2000X-HD but pretty silent.
To make an idea is under the noise from Keysight 2K which should be the same as Keysight 3K.
37 dB Siglent  vs  41,5 dB Keysight.
The sound of PWM driving of the fan can be distinguished over the air flow .

[Martin72]

It is not as quiet as 2000X-HD but pretty silent.

Did you ever have an SDS2000X HD?
That thing is DEAD in terms of loudness.
I had never experienced anything like it before or since.
The 1000X HD has the same fan as the 2000Xplus, so I expect the same noise level.
Not really loud, but quiet is somehow different.

[2N3055]

...
I don't have SDS1000xHD and didn't try it, but if that one is 2000xHD quiet that would be awesome.
Maybe Skander36 could give a comment on acoustic signature...

It is not as quiet as 2000X-HD but pretty silent.
To make an idea is under the noise from Keysight 2K which should be the same as Keysight 3K.
37 dB Siglent  vs  41,5 dB Keysight.
The sound of PWM driving of the fan can be distinguished over the air flow .

Thanks for that.
Yes that is quite quiet... :-)

You say PWM? Is it a tone or clicking?

[tautech]

It is not as quiet as 2000X-HD but pretty silent.

Did you ever have an SDS2000X HD?
That thing is DEAD in terms of loudness.
I had never experienced anything like it before or since.
The 1000X HD has the same fan as the 2000Xplus, so I expect the same noise level.
Not really loud, but quiet is somehow different.

SDS2000X HD noise.....or lack of it, is in a class of its own. <right and proper use of a smart fan. 

SDS1000X HD while using the same fan, is not as whisper quiet. 
Acceptable, yes but IMO, a missed opportunity.


OTOH first boot of SDS6000A,    well it didn't last long before the fan slows to provide acceptable noise levels.

[skander36]

...
I don't have SDS1000xHD and didn't try it, but if that one is 2000xHD quiet that would be awesome.
Maybe Skander36 could give a comment on acoustic signature...

It is not as quiet as 2000X-HD but pretty silent.
To make an idea is under the noise from Keysight 2K which should be the same as Keysight 3K.
37 dB Siglent  vs  41,5 dB Keysight.
The sound of PWM driving of the fan can be distinguished over the air flow .

Thanks for that.
Yes that is quite quiet... :-)

You say PWM? Is it a tone or clicking?

Clicking.

[Martin72]

OTOH first boot of SDS6000A,    well it didn't last long before the fan slows to provide acceptable noise levels.

Guess what I experience on the 3000...
I think I'll make a short clip of it.
The SDS3000X HD clearly answers the question of whether the fan is controlled or not.

[skander36]

It is not as quiet as 2000X-HD but pretty silent.

Did you ever have an SDS2000X HD?
That thing is DEAD in terms of loudness.
...

No I did not have it.
But you don't let any occasions to remember this to us 
So I take this as reference.

P.S. I think is the same as RTB2K.

[Martin72]

I even have measurements of it...
However, it's never all sunshine.
The 2000X HD is not exactly a cold device....

[skander36]

I even have measurements of it...
However, it's never all sunshine.
The 2000X HD is not exactly a cold device....

There is something more dead than a dead R&S FPC1500. It's fanless. Like using a phone or a tablet.

[hansibull]

I've had an SDS2000X HD sitting on a VESA stand right next to my computer at work for the last six months, and I've been very impressed with this scope. So much so that I decided to sell my own Rigol DS1054Z and buy myself an SDS1000X HD to have at home.

And after close to three months of waiting, it arrived yesterday! I haven't had that much time to play with it yet, but these are my impressions when compared to the SDS2000X HD I've become quite familiar with:

• The fan is definitely louder on the 1000X HD than on the 2000X HD, and it does not seem to be temperature-controlled. The airflow noise is insignificant, but the "clicking" sound from the fan motor is something the 2000X HD doesn't have. I'll probably replace the fan once the warranty is out.
• The 1000X HD UI is much smoother and way less laggy than on the 2000x HD! Floating windows (like the Trigger Type menu) lag really badly when moving it around on the 2000X HD screen, but is butter smooth on the 1000X HD.
• I thought the black color would annoy me, but I actually like it! It also helps that the instrument looks like a professional piece of gear, unlike the recent scopes from the other major Chinese TE manufacturer.
• Some of the LED button colors are way off. For instance, channel 2 has a pink trace on the screen and a pink circle around the BNC, but the channel 2 button has a "deep red" color that doesn't look like the correct color at all. The other channel buttons are better, but not "perfect" like on the 2000X HD.
• The boot times are pretty similar between the 1000X HD and the 2000X HD. I haven't compared them side to side, but it feels like it's in the same ballpark.
• The 2000X HD came with fixed 10x probes, with probe detection, but the 1000X HD came with switchable probes without any probe detection. I could be up for a new set of probes, so if you have any recommendations, please let me know!

[kripton2035]

I wanted a zone trigger to replace my 30 years old fluke pm3394... I bought the sds2000hd last year and don't regret it
I read that the zone trigger is not on the 1000hd, for price and technical reasons
so the 2000hd is the first in price scope to have this feature ?

[skander36]

I wanted a zone trigger to replace my 30 years old fluke pm3394... I bought the sds2000hd last year and don't regret it
I read that the zone trigger is not on the 1000hd, for price and technical reasons
so the 2000hd is the first in price scope to have this feature ?

Yes the 1000X-HD does not have zone trigger. If you want 12 bit and zone trigger you need 2000X-HD.

[skander36]

...

• Some of the LED button colors are way off. For instance, channel 2 has a pink trace on the screen and a pink circle around the BNC, but the channel 2 button has a "deep red" color that doesn't look like the correct color at all. The other channel buttons are better, but not "perfect" like on the 2000X HD.

...

yes they could have done a better job matching the colors ...[/list]

[tautech]

I wanted a zone trigger to replace my 30 years old fluke pm3394... I bought the sds2000hd last year and don't regret it
I read that the zone trigger is not on the 1000hd, for price and technical reasons
so the 2000hd is the first in price scope to have this feature ?

We first saw Zone triggers in SDS5000X and then SDS2000X Plus before any 12bit models were released.