Rigol 5074 vs Siglent SDS2104X Plus vs Keysight DSOX1204G

[normi]

Normi, did you get the MSO 5074 in the end ? If so, how is it, and did you do the hack too ?
Thanks Steve

Yes, got the MSO5074, did the upgrades, have no regrets. Impressive features, and worth the $990. I am just finishing up on the testing of the DIY  logic probes, so far so good.
Scope had free licenses as part of promotion for decodes, AWG, power analysis, only bandwidth and 200M memory required licensing.

Best option to select a scope is to make note of what you will use it for, then make a list of scopes that satisfy this use and are within your budget. If none are within budget then increase budget or eliminate features which may not be important.  There is always going to be a better and cheaper scope coming in the future, but that's the nature of technology and if you keep waiting for the next best thing you will never buy anything.

[kcbrown]

b) Siglents don't obey you even when you manually set the buffer size. See the image below, 200M points configured, 10.0 (ten point zero!) points captured.

Since nobody seems to have addressed this ...

The buffer size setting is for the maximum size of the capture, not the guaranteed size of the capture.  It defines the point at which the scope will start to reduce the capture sample rate (the actual sampler, I believe, always runs at full speed in order to feed the triggering mechanism, and likely for other things as well).

The scope captures either as many points as the maximum sampling rate (which is dependent on architecture and enabled channels) multiplied by the time width of the screen will get you, or the configured buffer size, whichever is smaller.

[Steve12366]

Might pick your brains about the hack 

[2N3055]

b) Siglents don't obey you even when you manually set the buffer size. See the image below, 200M points configured, 10.0 (ten point zero!) points captured.

Since nobody seems to have addressed this ...

The buffer size setting is for the maximum size of the capture, not the guaranteed size of the capture.  It defines the point at which the scope will start to reduce the capture sample rate (the actual sampler, I believe, always runs at full speed in order to feed the triggering mechanism, and likely for other things as well).

The scope captures either as many points as the maximum sampling rate (which is dependent on architecture and enabled channels) multiplied by the time width of the screen will get you, or the configured buffer size, whichever is smaller.

He knows. That is exactly how his MicSig behaves in auto. He's just being "provocative" (that is PC for trolling  )

[Fungus]

He knows. That is exactly how his MicSig behaves in auto.

In auto mode, sure.

But ... on my Micsig I can manually tell it to use all the memory and it will.

[2N3055]

He knows. That is exactly how his MicSig behaves in auto.

In auto mode, sure.

But ... on my Micsig I can manually tell it to use all the memory and it will.

Yes we know..   

[kcbrown]

He knows. That is exactly how his MicSig behaves in auto. He's just being "provocative" (that is PC for trolling  )

He might know, but the other readers here might not.  That's why it's best to not leave incorrect or misleading statements unaddressed in public forums.

[tautech]

He knows. That is exactly how his MicSig behaves in auto.

In auto mode, sure.

But ... on my Micsig I can manually tell it to use all the memory and it will.

And how many key presses are required to exit auto memory mode ?

Nowhere in the topic title do I see mention of Micsig. 

[kcbrown]

He knows. That is exactly how his MicSig behaves in auto.

In auto mode, sure.

But ... on my Micsig I can manually tell it to use all the memory and it will.

And you can manually tell the Siglent to do the same -- by setting the timebase and memory depth appropriately.

Both will accomplish the same thing.  All that differs is how you tell them to accomplish it.