Rigol DM3068 vs Agilent 34461A

[dp]

Whether actually needed or not, a 6.5 digit DMM has a lot of sex appeal for the hobbyist. And these two instruments are amongst the most popular for this category of users. As I have both of them, I decided to make a comparison, from the hobbyist point of view, for the benefit of other hobbyists who might be considering the purchase of such a beast. So, here it goes:

Rigol DM3068 pros

• Price (the Agilent is about 1.5 times more expensive)
• Resolution: 2.2 Mcount vs 1.2 Mcount
• All interfaces installed by default (USB, LAN, RS232, GPIB)
• Boot time: 16 sec vs 30 sec
• One button for each of the main functions, no shift key
• Illuminated buttons
• Capacitance measurement
• Support for thermocouple sensors (temperature measurement)

Agilent 34461A pros

• Colour, high resolution display
• Input and sense terminals on front and rear panels
• Trend display much better implemented (the high res display makes the difference, see the attached image)
• Probe hold function extremely useful
• Far better written manual
• Less noisy fan
• Unobtrusive power button light (the modulated light emitted by Rigol when in off state makes me disconnect it from mains)
• Firmware upgrades available on Agilent's site
• Useful software provided on Agilent's site (BenchVue)
• The low current input works up to 3A and has an 11A fuse

The relative importance of the various points above is a matter of personal judgment. From my point of view, the Agilent is the better choice, if you can afford the price difference, but none of them is a bad choice.

[rodpp]

Thank you for the comparison.

How about the measurements, I say both reading the same source?

[dp]

On DCV, where they have the best precision, there are differences of several units in the last digit.

[Noise Floor]

Agilent 34461A pros

• Colour, high resolution display
• Input and sense terminals on front and rear panels
• Trend display much better implemented (the high res display makes the difference, see the attached image)
• Probe hold function extremely useful
• Far better written manual
• Less noisy fan
• Unobtrusive power button light (the modulated light emitted by Rigol when in off state makes me disconnect it from mains)
• Firmware upgrades available on Agilent's site
• Useful software provided on Agilent's site (BenchVue)
• The low current input works up to 3A and has an 11A fuse

The relative importance of the various points above is a matter of personal judgment. From my point of view, the Agilent is the better choice, if you can afford the price difference, but none of them is a bad choice.

How much quieter is the the fan?  I know it sounds like a small detail, but it matters to me as I have a ton of fan noise already that is a bit taxing.  Thanks for mentioning the fact.

[rodpp]

On DCV, where they have the best precision, there are differences of several units in the last digit.

Thank you! So, certainly this difference is in the accuracy tolerance of these two meters.

In the Agilent marketing material (34460A & 34461A 6½ Digit Truevolt Series Digital Multimeters - Data Sheet, page 5: http://www.home.agilent.com/agilent/redirector.jspx?action=ref&cname=AGILENT_EDITORIAL&ckey=2318052&lc=por&cc=BR&nfr=-536902435.1058513.00) there is a comparison of the Agilent Truevolt multimeters against three others unnamed brands.

The Noise and injected current and Input bias current are compared and the Agilent performs much better. Can you confirm that?

And there are other functions/features/characteristics related with the "measure quality" where the Rigol DM3068 is better?

Thanks again!

[Circuitous]

I have been using a DM3068 for a couple of years, and then got a 34461A... I liked it so much more that I bought a second 34461A.  I do use the 3068 still, but I like using the 34461A enough that the boot time is worth the wait.   If I'm in a hurry, I fire up the 34410A, which is very quick.

I really haven't noticed much fan noise from my 34461A's, but I can definitely tell when the 3068 is running.

As for the question about measurement differences, I'll have to check, but the Rigol might be able to test larger capacitors.

Although the Rigol has more dedicated feature buttons, I find the Agilent easier to use.  It's certainly much easier when trying to access histograms and statistics (min, max, average, stdev...).

On the Agilent, I find the BenchVue software to be handy

Some users may find the Rigol fits their specific needs, but if you don't know and the price difference isn't an issue, then I'd go for the 34461A

[Sbampato12]

Prices apart, the 34461A looks much more sexy.....

But any of them look so freaking good on a bench...

[Circuitous]

Prices apart, the 34461A looks much more sexy.....

But any of them look so freaking good on a bench...

Yeah, they are pretty!

[Sailor]

@   Circuitous

What's that microscope thingy at the end of your bench? What sort of working distance, mag, dof, etc do you get?

[Circuitous]

@   Circuitous
What's that microscope thingy at the end of your bench? What sort of working distance, mag, dof, etc do you get?

That's a Mantis Compact microscope, it provides stereo vision without having to peer through the usual eye pieces of a binocular microscope. 
http://www.visioneng.us/products/stereo-microscopes/mantis-compact-visual-inspection-microscope

Other info and a clearer picture are here: http://corgitronics.com/the-bench/
I have the Mantis mounted on the articulated arm, and extension link.  That provides a really good reach across the bench, and the link also allows it to retract(fold back) farther.
http://www.all-spec.com/products/MCHAAUS.html

Dave reviewed the Mantis Elite (very nice) some time ago:

I have been using it with a 4x objective, but I also have a 6x.  If I need more magnification, I switch to the AmScope.
With the 4x lens:

• Working Distance: 3.78" (96mm)
• Field of View: 1.08" (27.5mm)

[Hydrawerk]

Well, although it is old technology, I like VFDs on multimeters. These displays are fast, have high contrast and unmatched viewing angle. Once I saw this beast at school... Well, LCDs are better for histograms and graphs, OK.

[dp]

How much quieter is the the fan?

Very quiet. You need a relatively quiet environment to hear it, otherwise it's lost in the noise. Any of my other devices with fan (scope, DMM, PS) will cover it.

[grego]

Prices apart, the 34461A looks much more sexy.....

But any of them look so freaking good on a bench...

Yeah, they are pretty!

You, sir, are my new idol with that nice neat workbench.  I need to get cracking on reorganizing mine.  Lots of pretty gear there too.

[dp]

And there are other functions/features/characteristics related with the "measure quality" where the Rigol DM3068 is better?

Not that I know of. As already mentioned in the original post, Rigol can do capacitance, and work with thermocouple sensors, while Agilent can't. What I forgot to mention is that only Rigol has dual display capability (but I don't know what else besides frequency it can display).

The much better display, probe hold, trend display and 3A on the small current input (among other features) make Agilent the winner on the ergonomics front. If you want/need a second 6.5 digit DMM, Rigol is an excellent candidate, due to its price.

[theatrus]

Well, although it is old technology, I like VFDs on multimeters. These displays are fast, have high contrast and unmatched viewing angle. Once I saw this beast at school... Well, LCDs are better for histograms and graphs, OK.

Set the 3458a to a very small integration time and watch the display become an effective blur :-)

[ebclr]

"past performance does not necessarily predict future results"

Made in USA HP, isn't made in Asia Keysight

[2N3055]

"past performance does not necessarily predict future results"

Made in USA HP, isn't made in Asia Keysight

As you can see, every time someone mentions DM3068, within few answers it degrades to singing praises to how glorious HP of yore was fantastic (which is true and well deserved), and how good 3458A is, and how much better it is than all else..
None of that has nothing to do with DM3068, and also, engineers that did that in HP are long gone. Keysight is no HP, no matter what they marketing department says..
It is still reputable company, but not what it used to be...  Same with Fluke..

[wraper]

engineers that did that in HP are long gone. Keysight is no HP, no matter what they marketing department says..

https://www.keysight.com/en/pd-2270273-pn-34461A/digital-multimeter-6-digit-34401a-replacement-truevolt-dmm?cc=LV&lc=eng

Designed by the same team of engineers as the 34401A

None of that has nothing to do with DM3068

From my experience subpar quality control, slow and virtually non existing warranty service which tries to prove you are a giraffe instead of fixing the fault in a brand new meter.

[2N3055]

Designed by the same team of engineers as the 34401A

I highly doubt it.. The fact that few engineers stayed with the company for 20 years is not the whole team, not to mention key people..

From my experience subpar quality control, slow and virtually non existing warranty service which tries to prove you are a giraffe instead of fixing the fault in a brand new meter.

Your experience is yours, and I'm sorry that happened to you...

Mine is quite the opposite.. Rigol equipment I have works better than specs, reliably and well. I saved a lot of money and it did the job.. It paid off
Only problem I had with Rigol was problems with DP831 PSU screen.. I reported it to vendor I bought it from and in 4 days I received brand new one replacement.
They even paid for shipping for both replacement and one I sent to them broken.. And a few days later Rigol EU contacted me to check if all is ok now...

I don't know if your or my case is typical.. I can't generalize from either your or mine isolated example...
I simply, as you did, share my experience...

Regards,

Sinisa