Looking for a Instek GDS-3000 series scope review

[Rossco]

Has anyone had a looksy of the GDS-3000 series scopes? I was looking  for a 4 channel scope in the $2500 US/CAN dollar range. The New Agilent DSOX series looks great along with the Instek GDS-3000 series. It is hard to find any reviews online about the GDS-series scope. If anyone has any first or second hand feedback let me know.

[saturation]

There are some, but none I can recall with this model specifically.  You did try the eevblog search engine for the other models, yes?

https://www.eevblog.com/forum/index.php?topic=156.0

The most comprehensive one is a pdf file, linked above, then there are individual posts of 1062 by owners, all over this forum.

[Rossco]

Yes I did see that 1000 series info. The Instek GDS-3000 series has been out only about 4 months (thats a guess). It has really interesting specs that in some ways rival the DSOX series just reviewed. I might take the sales guy up on his offer to let me have a demo of it. Maybe I will even do a quick review and post. My only problem is it would be nice to have a noisy target system or function generator to hook up to to do testing. I am just in the begining stages of setting up a lab. If anyone would like throw their two cents in after looking at the specs for a second set of eyes that would be great.   

[alm]

From a quick glance at the specs:
- Only 200MHz bandwidth limit on the 350MHz model? Usually 20MHz is also offered.
- Trigger sensitivity is not great IMO, but I'm not sure what the competing models offer.
- 25kpoints memory is not great, and it doesn't state if it's per channel or shared between the channels.
- Only CAT I rating for the inputs?
- No mention of waveform update rate

Looks like sample rate is interleaved between the channels, since the dual channel 150/250MHz models have a max. sample rate of 2.5GS/s, and the quad channel models can do 5GS/s. No mention if it drops further when enabling more channels (will it be 1.25GS/s in dual channel mode on the dual channel model?.

Nothing particularly exciting apart from the bandwidth in my opinion, doesn't appear to be in the same league as the Agilent 2000X series.

[tinhead]

It is hard to find any reviews online about the GDS-series scope.

but many videos on youtube (with fraking computer voice), i know that's not real reviews but at least something

From a quick glance at the specs:
- Only 200MHz bandwidth limit on the 350MHz model? Usually 20MHz is also offered.

datasheet and user manual is a bit better than the info on the website, it does have such bw selectors:
150MHz model: Full, 20MHz
250MHz model: Full, 20MHz, 100MHz
350MHz model: Full, 20MHz, 100MHz, 200MHz

From a quick glance at the specs:
- No mention of waveform update rate

right, there is even nice compare to WaveJet, DPO2000 and TDS3000

http://www.testequipmentconnection.com/specs/Instek_GDS-3354.PDF

but no single word about wfrm/s, even not in "VPO Technology Introduction" which is actually talking about dead time

http://www.gwinstek.com/vpo/

This mean it would be not better than on WaveJet / DPO2000 or TDS3000
Tek DPO2000 - 5k wfms/s
Tek DPO2000 - 3.6k wfms/s
LeCroy WaveJet - 3.6k wfms/s

so let's gues, somethign about 2k - 2.5k wfrm/s

There is "GW Instek GDS-3000 vs. Tek TDS3000" video on youtube, if you watch carefully the TDS is updating faster the
same video signal ...

The 5GSs on 4ch model are interleaved, giving you 1.25 in 4 and 3 ch mode, 2.5 in 2ch and 5GSs in 1ch mode
which is "ok" (at least in one chan mode  5Gss there), but it is not good on 2ch DSO because there is only 1.25GSs or 2.5GSs
available.

There is only 1kHz for probe compensation, hmm.

What i like, without testing are
- 50, 75 and 1M ohm selectable input impendanze (but with 75Ohm bw is limited to 150MHz!)
- colored persistency display
- the multi window display (like Yokogawa)
- HDTV triggers
- TTL/ECL trigger presets
- event delayed trigger (waits for 1 to 65535 events to trigger)

Nothing particularly exciting apart from the bandwidth in my opinion, doesn't appear to be in the same league as the Agilent 2000X series.

fully agree

[EEVblog]

http://www.gwinstek.com/vpo/

This mean it would be not better than on WaveJet / DPO2000 or TDS3000
Tek DPO2000 - 5k wfms/s
Tek DPO2000 - 3.6k wfms/s
LeCroy WaveJet - 3.6k wfms/s

so let's gues, somethign about 2k - 2.5k wfrm/s

That would be my guess too, maybe even double that.

The thing with the Agilent 2000 series is that it uses the exact same ASIC as the 3000 series, so is actually capable of 1,000,000 wfm/s if the market catches up and Agilent decides to tweak a few bits in the software...

$2000 for 150MHz/2CH for the Instek vs $2100 ($2000 street?) for Agilent 200MHz/2CH or 100MHz/4CH or 100MHz/2CH/8logic
The Instek has a few more features built in, but I'd chose the Agilent any day.

EDIT: Notice you said $2500, in that case you can get the Agilent 200MHz/4CH or you might be able to talk'em down on the 100MHz/4CH/8digital model

Dave.

[Rossco]

I think I will sttrech my budget a liitle to $3000. I was quoted $2950 for a DPOX3014. This will allow me to expand and get the Communication modules as required.

Thanks for the input guys.

Just on a side note....
Tektronics has sure discounted the DPO2000/3000 series scopes as of a day or two ago. Even throwing in an optional module.

See link.   http://www.tek.com/products/oscilloscopes/landing/2011salesevent/

[EEVblog]

I've been offered one of these scope for review by a local dealer, but not sure if I'm take them up, too much of a backlog at the moment.

Dave.

[shadowless]

Any news on this?

[EEVblog]

If I find time I'll see about getting one for review.
Not sure if he'll let me take it apart though...

Dave.

[shadowless]

From you gut feel how do you think the new Agilent scope would stack up?  Considering that they are in the similar price range but with longer warranty they are a tempting alternative.

[marmad]

I join the chorus of others hoping for a review of the Instek GDS-3000 series by Dave.

On paper, from a quick perusal of the two manuals, the Instek GDS-3154 is more bang for the buck then the Agilent DSOX2014A. The only thing that I can see that the Agilent has going for it is the faster wfrms/s update rate - and slightly larger memory.

But the Instek has:
More bandwidth at the same price point
Faster sampling rate
MUCH larger trigger selection (the trigger selection on the 2000X series is rather abysmal)
More Math selections
Larger screen
Larger active waveform area (no fixed side menu)
Better use of screen real estate in general
MUCH better standard i/o (USB, LAN, SVGA, RS-232, Line, PASS/FAIL, Trigger Out)

Plus the following features (as mentioned by tinhead) which aren't included in the Agilent:
- 50, 75 and 1M ohm selectable input impendance
- Colored persistency display
- Quad-window display with independantly adjustable vertical and horizontal controls - this is fantastic for a 4-channel scope.

The prices are fairly similar - but if you add the LAN/VGA module onto the Agilent, which is standard with the Instek - the difference in price becomes significantly better for the Instek.

[Bored@Work]

But the Instek has:

Horrible service if you are in Europe.

[marmad]

Horrible service if you are in Europe.

This is at least the fourth or fifth post I've read of yours on the blog decrying the service of of one company or another (and I suspect there's others I haven't seen).  As such, I will apply Occam's Razor and select the hypothesis that tends towards the simplest theory.

[saturation]

In the US, Instek is widely supported and sold, but there is a US branch of Instek.  This is a great Taiwanese made scope so QC is better, not China like some of their other wares.  I personally have not used it, just seen it.

To that however, Instek is reputable enough for this scope that you can compare the spec sheets vs Agilent and be reasonably sure its valid.

http://www.tequipment.net/swf/Instek/Instek-GDS3154.swf

I join the chorus of others hoping for a review of the Instek GDS-3000 series by Dave.

[marmad]

http://www.tequipment.net/swf/Instek/Instek-GDS3154.swf

Yes, that site has the best prices I've seen on the Instek GDS-3000 series.

One thing I noticed in the flash movie though - which I hadn't noticed before - why did Instek put a shiny piece of plastic over the LCD?  Do they really think that the screen needs extra protection in the hands of someone who just spent a couple grand on it?

[marmad]

Interesting series of videos on the Agilent 2000X series (with later comparisons to the Instek GDS-3000 series).  Obviously posted by an Instek employee - and in Chinese - nonetheless, they are easy to follow and of interest for comparison purposes:

Showing the crippled features and non-functional buttons on the Agilent 2000X series:
Agilent DSO-X 2000A???

Showing  the odd 4x divisional split - instead of the usual 5x - on the Agilent 2000X series screens:
Agilent DSO-X 2000A ??

Comparing the ranging of the Agilent 2000X series to the Instek GDS-3000 series:


Comparing measurement and cursor data display of the Agilent 2000X series to the Instek GDS-3000 series:


Comparing zoomed portion of a signal on the Agilent 2000X series to the Instek GDS-3000 series:

[shadowless]

I think there are English versions of these Instek's employee fault finding video on youtube with the electronic voice. These are really badly made comparison review.

You probably won't find a GDS3000 review.  They are scared to pass it to eevblog to be review properly anyway.

[marmad]

I think there are English versions of these Instek's employee fault finding video on youtube with the electronic voice. These are really badly made comparison review.

No, these are the only ones with the new Agilent; the electronic voice ones are comparisons with older scopes.  "Fault finding", in English anyway, implies that these are somehow not REAL concerns, and yet, regardless of the fact of who made the videos, they are worth noting.  At least one of them (the crippled features / non-functioning buttons) was mentioned by Dave in his review (he called it 'crazy').

You probably won't find a GDS3000 review.  They are scared to pass it to eevblog to be review properly anyway.

How did you arrive at this conclusion?  From what I read, one was offered for review - but declined by Dave because of time constraints (and/or lack of interest).

[Bored@Work]

Horrible service if you are in Europe.

This is at least the fourth or fifth post I've read of yours on the blog decrying the service of of one company or another (and I suspect there's others I haven't seen).

I just write down the experience I have. I always find it funny when people ask for experience but then get upset if the experience is not what they wanted to hear. And I am greatly amused when fanboys go ballistic over it. Yes, I deal with a lot of equipment in my day job and have a good bunch of stuff at home. Although, unless others here, I do not usually engage in dick-waving who has the largest, most obscure or expensive equipment.

I can tell you from experience that Instek was not capable of servicing an instrument in Europe, although in total four GW Instek employees were involved in the saga. And all of them got quiet at one point or another - showing the typical Asian understanding of "service". I.e. becoming incommunicado when the customer stops buying the excuses and lies.

Which is sad, because Instek was OK in our book. Until we needed their service for the first time.  Now they are below the line, in the swamp of other throw-away equipment manufacturers not to touch, just a little bit more expensive.

[marmad]

I just write down the experience I have. I always find it funny when people ask for experience but then get upset if the experience is not what they wanted to hear. And I am greatly amused when fanboys go ballistic over it. Yes, I deal with a lot of equipment in my day job and have a good bunch of stuff at home. Although, unless others here, I do not usually engage in dick-waving who has the largest, most obscure or expensive equipment.

Go back and reread my post because you clearly didn't grasp the meaning.

[shadowless]

Here you go for the faults in English. The other taiwanese account setup specifically to do these 'comparisons'.
https://www.youtube.com/user/InstrumentVu#p/u

Wonder if the serial number of the 2002A scopes from the two different reviewer are the same.

I asked about GDS-3000 series in May in earlier post before i ended up with Agilent.

If you have watch Dave's video you would have heard that part that Instek refuse to send him stuff for review. I don't remember which video. Another source offered to i think.  Anyway i don't expect to see reviews of Instek products on eevblog anytime soon.

Some how i expect the Agilent to evolve over time via firmware updates.

[marmad]

Here you go for the faults in English. The other taiwanese account setup specifically to do these 'comparisons'.
https://www.youtube.com/user/InstrumentVu#p/u
Wonder if the serial number of the 2002A scopes from the two different reviewer are the same.

Look, I don't care if the videos are made by engineers that work at Instek - the only thing that matters is whether they have a valid point or not, right?  So let's look at their points, one by one:

Unimplemented features and unused buttons on Agilent 2000X:  I think this is a stupid mistake by Agilent in a couple of ways.  First, it's just bad interface design - and such a blatant cost-saving measure that it just comes across as kind of pathetic (why not spend a few cents more and at least make the buttons unlabeled and usable as hot keys on the 2000X?).  But even worse, in terms of inspiring customer loyalty, nothing says 'thank you for buying our product!' like having labelled dead buttons which do nothing but pop-up a text to remind you that you didn't spend enough of your hard-earned cash to merit the "cool" features.

Divisions split by four instead of the normal five: this is silly and a non-issue.  From what I can gather from the translations, the engineers(?) are wondering if Agilent has changed the standard marks on the scope because of some gauging problem.  Totally ridiculous.

Range distortion: this again, is a bit of a non-issue - but at least it highlights a feature of the Instek.  Many scopes (and certainly all cheap ones) have the problem with distortion when you pass the limits of the vertical range you're in.  Every now and then, you can get confused by a signal before realizing that you're looking at this overload distortion.  With the GDS-3000 series, they've taken the trouble to try to limit this distortion - again, not a big deal - but kind of nice to have it included when you plunk down $2K for a scope.  But it doesn't really have much to do with the Agilent in particular.

Measurement and cursor data display: I'm in complete agreement with the Instek guys about this one - the Agilent's capacity for (and usage of the screen for) measurement and cursor data display sucks - period.  Sure... show only 4 measurements OR cursor data - but designate a big chunk of screen real estate for the continual display of the Agilent logo.

Zoom distortion:  I'm not sure if they have a point about this one or not.  The zoomed-in portion on the Agilent DOES appear a little bit erratic for the edge of a calibration square wave with the trigger at that level - but perhaps it has to do with sin(x)/x.  I can get 'similar' type of behavior on my scope when I set the trigger level close to the knee.  Probably a non-issue; you'd have to test further to know for sure.

But really, what I don't understand is, why aren't the Instek guys comparing the GDS-3000's triggering capabilities and built-in outputs against the Agilent?

If you have watch Dave's video you would have heard that part that Instek refuse to send him stuff for review. I don't remember which video. Another source offered to i think.  Anyway i don't expect to see reviews of Instek products on eevblog anytime soon.

In this thread of 2 months ago  (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/index.php?topic=3920.msg52007#msg52007) Dave writes:
"I've been offered a GDS-3000 for review from the local rep, but I just don't have the time to do it at the moment I'm afraid."  So that's all I know about it.

[Bren]

Unimplemented features and unused buttons on Agilent 2000X:  I think this is a stupid mistake by Agilent in a couple of ways.  First, it's just bad interface design - and such a blatant cost-saving measure that it just comes across as kind of pathetic (why not spend a few cents more and at least make the buttons unlabeled and usable as hot keys on the 2000X?).  But even worse, in terms of inspiring customer loyalty, nothing says 'thank you for buying our product!' like having labelled dead buttons which do nothing but pop-up a text to remind you that you didn't spend enough of your hard-earned cash to merit the "cool" features.

Kinda hilarious if you think about it.

[tinhead]

i've watched some other GDS3000 videos,

https://www.youtube.com/user/iLoveDSO

and puuhh, the actuall screen wavefrom refresh look much better than on TDS3000,
and look on these 4 window split mode - even in that mode the update is not that bad.

The autoscale seems to work too, not that i need something like that, but usefull.
Power analyzer app and protocol decoder are available too, but unfortunately not shown in action.