Analog front end signal noise is also some diference between Rigol and Siglent.
These tests are comparable as much as possible.
(Note difference between Siglent Stdev and Rigol RMS (Rigol do not have Stdev so only way is use RMS and it include of course also DC offset)
Here Rigol is 100MHz BW and Siglent is 200MHz. If we reduce Siglent BW to 100MHz it reduce noise level around 3dB. As can see Siglent have lot of less noise even when it have double bandwidth.
Siglent have full resolution 500uV/div and Rigol have 5mV/div full vertical resolution.
With 10x probe it mean that highest sensitivity with full vertical resolution with Rigol is 50mV/div and with Siglent 5mV/div.
Other thing is that Rigol use highly decimated data for measurements. (also it map all samples to display, example here all 7Msample is mapped to display memory without decimation also for better intensity gradation so that it is dependent about one wfm data density on display and also sequential overlayed traces specially when use settings what give more wfm/s speed but less horizontal scrunch)
In this image Siglent can measure horizontally using full 1ns resolution.
But Rigol time resolution is perhaps roughly something like 10000 times less. (somewhere in forum is old thread where is exact data)
Of course all depends user needs what are important things but differencies between SDS1000X-E and DS1000Z is really huge if start looking all things. Is it even fair to compare so different things, even if some main parameters are same. What are same. Max 1GSa/s, 7" display, 4 channels and shared vertical controls. Siglent is more expensive, yes. And it is LOT of more if look its power as tool.
But only IF user need. Of course if example this Rigol 1kZ is more than enough for user needs then why pay more. It is still today lot of scope with its price!
But then, there is possible also things what user can not think before he find how useful some features are if he . Just example always background working waveform history buffer. Of course it is perhaps widely underestimated because most have never used this kind of feature and then no one talk about it - how talk things what do not have and/or know. Because most of scopes (specially low end scopes) do not have it at all or have some nearly useless "frame recorder" without full raw acquisition data.
![](https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/siglent-sds1104x-e-vs-rigol-ds1054z-advice/?action=dlattach;attach=507893;image)
I think difference is tiny bit more than negligible.