Siglent New SDS800X HD First Bactch Unboxing And Tests And Teardown !

[Martin72]

Yes, I like the color differentiation in the tables much more, in the example it simply fits better than the dark/not quite so dark display in Siglent.

[PELL]

Update: This scope is hackable, and it is surprisingly simple: just use Siglent keygen you can find on the forum (although I don't know which keygen exactly)

SDS804X ---> SDS824X, 50Mpts ---> 100Mpts mem-depth, 70M ---> 200M bandwidth.

The mem-depth is real, you can export a nearly 200MBytes binary wave file, which, you know 100Mpts*12bits/8 = 150MBytes

[Antonio90]

So this answers one of the main SDS800x-HD thread questions. Full memdepth and bandwith do not depend on hardware differences, only software. At least on this early hardware revision.

[Martin72]

They won't go to the trouble of producing different hardware configurations now either, as this would probably be counterproductive in view of the targeted price range.

[rf-loop]

Update: This scope is hackable, and it is surprisingly simple: just use Siglent keygen you can find on the forum (although I don't know which keygen exactly)

SDS804X ---> SDS824X, 50Mpts ---> 100Mpts mem-depth, 70M ---> 200M bandwidth.

The mem-depth is real, you can export a nearly 200MBytes binary wave file, which, you know 100Mpts*12bits/8 = 150MBytes

Still you use RMS for measure noise. (even if input coupling is AC but your measurement is True RMS from data after ADC.

For base noise measurement you need use Stdev (aka AC RMS and this is now AC  RMS from data after ADC)

I have not time to demonstrate now all how it can affect in different signal situations.
In this particular case there is only but least internal DC offset residue.
Right way is Stdev.

Here example:  (not current SDS800X HD or current SDS1000X HD)
Now DC coupled input ... no big effect. But clear difference still between RMS and ACRMS
Then note, this is 200MHz BW..    for compare different oscilloscopes with different BW we can use 20MHz BW what is available in every scope and then compare these (if scopes full BW's are different...as we know noise rise (part of total noise least) when BW rise...independent of oscilloscope brand etc)




Ch1 full BW:  RMS, ACRMS (stdev), Ch4: 20M BW,  RMS, ACRMS (stdev)





then just other sample


Note also here small but clearly visible DC offset in Ch4 (what is included in RMS of course but removed from Stdev (AC RMS)

[tv84]

Update: This scope is hackable, and it is surprisingly simple: just use Siglent keygen you can find on the forum (although I don't know which keygen exactly)

What is the SCPI answer to?

:syst:board?

[PELL]

Update: This scope is hackable, and it is surprisingly simple: just use Siglent keygen you can find on the forum (although I don't know which keygen exactly)

SDS804X ---> SDS824X, 50Mpts ---> 100Mpts mem-depth, 70M ---> 200M bandwidth.

The mem-depth is real, you can export a nearly 200MBytes binary wave file, which, you know 100Mpts*12bits/8 = 150MBytes

Still you use RMS for measure noise. (even if input coupling is AC but your measurement is True RMS from data after ADC.

I am sorry, forgot to tell my friend about this.

Will try to get it right next time

[PELL]

Update: This scope is hackable, and it is surprisingly simple: just use Siglent keygen you can find on the forum (although I don't know which keygen exactly)

What is the SCPI answer to?

:syst:board?

Will try. I probably tell my friend to register an account on this forum and see if he have some free time to get this. Because he is quite busy recently preparing for term exams.

[tautech]

Update: This scope is hackable, and it is surprisingly simple: just use Siglent keygen you can find on the forum (although I don't know which keygen exactly)

SDS804X ---> SDS824X, 50Mpts ---> 100Mpts mem-depth, 70M ---> 200M bandwidth.

The mem-depth is real, you can export a nearly 200MBytes binary wave file, which, you know 100Mpts*12bits/8 = 150MBytes

Yes early SDS1000X HD also.

[Martin72]

All that said, kudos to Rigol for being first to market in this affordable 12-bit space (much as they were with the DS1054) and no doubt pushing Siglent to compete.

With the SDS800X HD, I have some doubts as to whether the Scope is the answer to Rigol's DHO 800.
As a rule, development takes quite a long time, all the longer the more one is concerned with bringing a product onto the market that is as finished as possible, which can certainly be attributed to Siglent.
In the meantime, the Siglent 800 is apparently available on the Chinese market - does anyone here really believe that Siglent can bring a completely new 12-bit scope in the 7" screen size class onto the market just 3 months after the global launch of the DHO800/900 series?

[Veteran68]

does anyone here really believe that Siglent can bring a completely new 12-bit scope in the 7" screen size class onto the market just 3 months after the global launch of the DHO800/900 series?

Well no doubt this has been in Siglent's pipeline for some time. They didn't just start working on it after Rigol released the DHO800/900 series. Rigol just beat them to market, and as you point out, Siglent seems more likely to release a more finished product rather than rush things just to get to market first. For all we know they've been working on it as long or longer than Rigol was.

That said, being 2nd to market brings some advantages -- you get to see what the market response was to the 1st, and to focus on filling any glaring gaps the competitor either didn't consider or thought were unimportant. So you can distinguish your release from theirs and take market share. This healthy competition creates an oscillation effect that motivates each to improve their designs, which is good for all of us. The entry/hobbyist market is much more constrained by margins than the high cost pro market, so their profit motivator is getting and maintaining volume. They can't afford to sit around.

I hope it doesn't happen, but at some point Siglent may decide the economics just don't justify the cutthroat hobbyist market and may forfeit the low end to Rigol, Hantek, FNIRSI, et al, while shifting more towards the pro or "A" brand market where they can demand higher prices. They already seem to have a considerably higher premium product line than Rgol does. I do hope they stay competitive in the hobbyist/maker space though, as I really like their products and again, I'd expect Rigol to feel more pressure from Siglent than they do the cheaper Chinese brands mentioned. Rigol might get lazy if all they have to "be better than" is Hantek or FNIRSI.

[Antonio90]

It would be very bad news if either Siglent of Rigol won the economic race grounding the other.

[PELL]

Update:

@rf-loop I think this time we are getting the true result, and it also the same as Siglent marketing "under 70uV noise at full bandwidth"

Also I noticed the CH3 noise is much smaller than others

@tv84: The SCPI command return a board version, see in the picture

[rf-loop]

Update:

@rf-loop I think this time we are getting the true result, and it also the same as Siglent marketing "under 70uV noise at full bandwidth"

Also I noticed the CH3 noise is much smaller than others

Yes. Thank you.

CH3 noise is naturally more low than others because CH3 is set for 20MHz BW when others have full BW
When there is wide bandwidth random noise and we then reduce bandwidth... if we half BW noise drops 3dB but in practice not perfectly because there in oscilloscope is not only "ideal" flat white noise.... there is more things what affect here.

[tv84]

@tv84: The SCPI command return a board version, see in the picture

That shows that the scope uses the public keygen. 

[Antonio90]

@tv84: The SCPI command return a board version, see in the picture

That shows that the scope uses the public keygen. 

And also that it could be updated at any time to use the dynamic key? Or that doesn't follow?

[PELL]

Update: 350M bandwidth white noise input to check frequency repones after hacking the scope to 200M

The -3dB point is around 250MHz I guess?

Edit: Also notice, that the input is terminated with a pretty low-quality external 50ohm connector, which causes some roughness to the input signal

[tv84]

And also that it could be updated at any time to use the dynamic key? Or that doesn't follow?

IMHO, that's correct but not necessarily a must.

Nonetheless, that has also been accommodated. 

[hpw]

Update:

@rf-loop I think this time we are getting the true result, and it also the same as Siglent marketing "under 70uV noise at full bandwidth"

Also I noticed the CH3 noise is much smaller than others

CH3 noise is naturally more low than others because CH3 is set for 20MHz BW when others have full BW
When there is wide bandwidth random noise and we then reduce bandwidth... if we half BW noise drops 3dB but in practice not perfectly because there in oscilloscope is not only "ideal" flat white noise.... there is more things what affect here.

Why only Ch3 what made no sense IMHO, as IMHO CH3 & Ch4 may acting equal or not??

Hp

[2N3055]

does anyone here really believe that Siglent can bring a completely new 12-bit scope in the 7" screen size class onto the market just 3 months after the global launch of the DHO800/900 series?

Well no doubt this has been in Siglent's pipeline for some time. They didn't just start working on it after Rigol released the DHO800/900 series. Rigol just beat them to market, and as you point out, Siglent seems more likely to release a more finished product rather than rush things just to get to market first. For all we know they've been working on it as long or longer than Rigol was.

That said, being 2nd to market brings some advantages -- you get to see what the market response was to the 1st, and to focus on filling any glaring gaps the competitor either didn't consider or thought were unimportant. So you can distinguish your release from theirs and take market share. This healthy competition creates an oscillation effect that motivates each to improve their designs, which is good for all of us. The entry/hobbyist market is much more constrained by margins than the high cost pro market, so their profit motivator is getting and maintaining volume. They can't afford to sit around.

I hope it doesn't happen, but at some point Siglent may decide the economics just don't justify the cutthroat hobbyist market and may forfeit the low end to Rigol, Hantek, FNIRSI, et al, while shifting more towards the pro or "A" brand market where they can demand higher prices. They already seem to have a considerably higher premium product line than Rgol does. I do hope they stay competitive in the hobbyist/maker space though, as I really like their products and again, I'd expect Rigol to feel more pressure from Siglent than they do the cheaper Chinese brands mentioned. Rigol might get lazy if all they have to "be better than" is Hantek or FNIRSI.

I find your analysis quite astute and I would like to add few points.

At this point it is clear that both of these 2 manufacturers already made their choices. They both are willing to provide equipment in what is called entry level segment. But Rigol decided to approach it as if it were a consumer products and target aggressively the hobby segment with less capable/less finished(refined?) products and lowest possible price. Siglent obviously, like you said, already behaves like A- manufacturer in many regards and tries to make serious instruments, even when they are entry level. Because of that they can command slightly higher price, because, they are basically not competing against cheapest Rigol offerings but A brands entry level gamut. Where Siglent is the one with better features and still much lower price.

[2N3055]

Update:

@rf-loop I think this time we are getting the true result, and it also the same as Siglent marketing "under 70uV noise at full bandwidth"

Also I noticed the CH3 noise is much smaller than others

CH3 noise is naturally more low than others because CH3 is set for 20MHz BW when others have full BW
When there is wide bandwidth random noise and we then reduce bandwidth... if we half BW noise drops 3dB but in practice not perfectly because there in oscilloscope is not only "ideal" flat white noise.... there is more things what affect here.

Why only Ch3 what made no sense IMHO, as IMHO CH3 & Ch4 may acting equal or not??

Hp

He enabled 20MHz BW limit on CH3. What is your question? Please explain a bit.

[hpw]

ok,

4 channels always active so BW limits for each channel even all 4 active.

While on some LeCroy WM, selecting 20Gs only 2 channels are active.

[2N3055]

ok,

4 channels always active so BW limits for each channel even all 4 active.

While on some LeCroy WM, selecting 20Gs only 2 channels are active.

20MHz is standard BW limit option on channels that all scopes have.

SDS800X HD samples
One channel mode: 2 GSa/s,
Two channel mode: 1 GSa/s,
Four channel mode: 500 MSa/s

Even 200MHz version is always 200MHz regardless of number of channels being used.

[Randy222]

I see this is a Siglent thread, along with the siglent vs rigol chatter.

It's not a compare thread.

[Martin72]