Which scope manufacturer provides the best user experience?

[TimNJ]

Thanks for the suggestion. I’m going to do an in depth comparison between GWInstek GDS-2000E and Siglent SDS1000X-E. They seem very similar at first glance, in terms of general specifications. I’d like to figure out if theres any reason the GWInstek is over double the price of the Siglent.

Did you overlook the GW has a bigger display and twice the sampling rate ?
Both these features are also available in the SDS2000X series models at comparable additional cost.

What you have to work with on the display is very important to some but each user has a different tolerance for clutter and information overload. Proficient scope users don't need their screen cluttered in measurements excepting for advanced measurements.

I quickly cobbled this screenshot together in an order to show how Siglent keep their display as tidy as possible and even with all the stuff actuated there's good use of what otherwise just looks like vacant space.

Totally aware of the bigger screen. Surprising what difference an extra inch makes. But what’s this about the sampling rate? I thought they were both 1GSa/s (max). Does the Instek not lose sampling rate as more channels are turned on.

My main scope at work is actually a Siglent SDS2104X. I don’t have too many complaints about it. Definitely better than the Rigol, in my opinion.

Thanks for your help and input.

[TimNJ]

I do feel that the GWInstek might have more solid/mature firmware at this point but that’s only a speculation.

It is not speculation. GW Instek has better polished firmware and does better testing before releasing firmware. The GW Instek just works as advertised. Also the GW Instek has a seperate select button which is way better compared to a push & rotate button in one you find on many scopes.

As ridiculous as this sounds, the fact that the GW Instek has a normal select button instead of that horribly unreliable pushable encoder thing, is a big advantage in my mind. The pushable knobs are fine to reset vertical or horizontal position but not on a selector knob! Why did everyone start doing that..

I’ve been really intrigued by the GW Instek ever since I saw it, and I’m surprised more people don’t talk about it around here.

[TimNJ]

I guess ultimately the question is: “Is it worth paying $500 more for a few UI/UX improvements?”

That’s a question only I can decide. It’s tough to put a price on those things.

[tautech]

But what’s this about the sampling rate? I thought they were both 1GSa/s (max). Does the Instek not lose sampling rate as more channels are turned on.

The 4ch GW has the same ADC layout as SDS2004X; 2x 2GSa/s ADC's that offer 2GSa/s with 1 channel active on each ADC or 1GSa when all channels are active. What the GW lacks vs SDS2000X models is significantly less memory.

In case you'd missed it for SDS1004X-E, they have the same dual ADC configuration but the memory setup is a little different. They have two blocks of 14 MPts, one for each ADC.

Totally aware of the bigger screen. Surprising what difference an extra inch makes.

Yep, if you were to use it all day you'd want the bigger display.
Still the background, fonts and trace colors of the little Siglent offer enough contrast that you can still use it in bright sunlight.
Happy hunting.

BTW, just seen your other comments.
Next week when you're in front of your SDS2104X, yank the Multipurpose knob off and fit one of the bigger ones from elsewhere on the front panel. 
Really the factory should've made that simple and easy improvement by now. 

[bugi]

Next week when you're in front of your SDS2104X, yank the Multipurpose knob off and fit one of the bigger ones from elsewhere on the front panel. 
Really the factory should've made that simple and easy improvement by now. 

O.o so simple?!?  I wonder if some seller would sell spare knobs for those (so no need to replace another from the panel)... (I'd also buy couple full encoders/whatever they use, as couple of mine are giving a nasty sound/feel while rotating, so for a future almost certain to happen self-repair...)

[TimNJ]

But what’s this about the sampling rate? I thought they were both 1GSa/s (max). Does the Instek not lose sampling rate as more channels are turned on.

The 4ch GW has the same ADC layout as SDS2004X; 2x 2GSa/s ADC's that offer 2GSa/s with 1 channel active on each ADC or 1GSa when all channels are active. What the GW lacks vs SDS2000X models is significantly less memory.

In case you'd missed it for SDS1004X-E, they have the same dual ADC configuration but the memory setup is a little different. They have two blocks of 14 MPts, one for each ADC.

Totally aware of the bigger screen. Surprising what difference an extra inch makes.

[emoji4]
Yep, if you were to use it all day you'd want the bigger display.
Still the background, fonts and trace colors of the little Siglent offer enough contrast that you can still use it in bright sunlight.
Happy hunting.

BTW, just seen your other comments.
Next week when you're in front of your SDS2104X, yank the Multipurpose knob off and fit one of the bigger ones from elsewhere on the front panel.  [emoji6]
Really the factory should've made that simple and easy improvement by now.  [emoji57]

Ah thanks. Then I guess my SDS1000X-E vs GDS-2000E comparison is not quite apples to apples. Perhaps SDS2000X is more appropriate to compare. The memory depth on the SDS2000X is quite insane but also horrendously slow when trying to move around/examine a captured waveform. Good feature to have though.

Thanks again. I feel like I’m leaning towards the GW Instek. (Almost out of need to satisfy my own curiosity about it.) Also, I’ve read that GW Instek is very good about updating firmware and responding to customer concerns.

[apblog]

Although I *love* my Keysight 3000T, I agree that the 1000 series isn't a great value compared to the GW Instek.

I agree that the GWI is probably better than the Siglent.  I've head nothing but bad things about Siglent firmware and my own experiences bear that out. 

Keep in mind too that the GWI 2000E is supposed to have a *fantastic* FFT.  I'm actually thinking about buying one to supplement my 3000T, just for the 1Mpoint FFT capability.  You should look into that yourself to confirm that I'm thinking of the right model, I can't seem to get to the GWI website right now.

[Fungus]

As ridiculous as this sounds, the fact that the GW Instek has a normal select button instead of that horribly unreliable pushable encoder thing, is a big advantage in my mind.

I agree 100%.

FWIW I also think most oscilloscopes could do with a redesign in the UI area, starting with the overuse of the encoder knob.

[Bob Sava]

GW Instek 1000B: "really horrible to use":

@10:30

[TimNJ]

Although I *love* my Keysight 3000T, I agree that the 1000 series isn't a great value compared to the GW Instek.

I agree that the GWI is probably better than the Siglent.  I've head nothing but bad things about Siglent firmware and my own experiences bear that out. 

Keep in mind too that the GWI 2000E is supposed to have a *fantastic* FFT.  I'm actually thinking about buying one to supplement my 3000T, just for the 1Mpoint FFT capability.  You should look into that yourself to confirm that I'm thinking of the right model, I can't seem to get to the GWI website right now.

Yes GDS-1000E, and even GDS-1000B (the little brother) have 1MPt FFT which looks like it could be surprisingly useful. Dave showed it working on a 1000B in some video. That said, the baby Siglent 1000X-E also has 1MPt FFT. Of course, that number is only part of the FFT story. Performa01’s review of the Siglent seems to imply that the performance was pretty good.

[TimNJ]

GW Instek 1000B: "really horrible to use":

@10:30

Ah yes, that’s the video. Hmm that’s too bad. It’s definitely running old firmware. I wonder it anything has changed. Should also be noted that the other scopes are much more expensive, save the Rigol whose FFT is utterly useless.

Maybe the Siglent has a better FFT after all!

[lem_ix]

Touch really shines for inputting digital triggers, maths, etc. It's a pain with the knob. I'd personally go for the Instek, currently have a R&S which is nice but as you said expensive.

[apblog]

Yes GDS-1000E, and even GDS-1000B (the little brother) have 1MPt FFT which looks like it could be surprisingly useful. Dave showed it working on a 1000B in some video. That said, the baby Siglent 1000X-E also has 1MPt FFT. Of course, that number is only part of the FFT story. Performa01’s review of the Siglent seems to imply that the performance was pretty good.

Yes, FFT is very useful.

One big factor for me is the speed at which it updates.  The Keysight only updates at a little faster than once per second,
best case. 

If I remember the video on the GWI FFT right, it was updating much faster.

Keep in mind that most of the time you will be averaging the FFT to lower the noise and see the signals.   I was recently using the Keysight FFT with 8x averaging to track down some noise interference problems, and there was no way I was ever going to see the 200ms noise burst like that.

[nctnico]

GW Instek 1000B: "really horrible to use":

That is Dave's opinion and he just doesn't like GW Instek for some reason. If you have tried to drive FFT on other scopes to get a real measurement done you'll quickly realise that the GW Instek's user interface is actually pretty good (and simple) in comparison.

[apblog]

I finally was able to access the GWI site. The MDO-2000E series is the GWI scope that I was thinking of, the one with the really nice FFT.

I wouldn't bother getting the built in power supply or AWG though, unless they are super cheap options.

[TimNJ]

I finally was able to access the GWI site. The MDO-2000E series is the GWI scope that I was thinking of, the one with the really nice FFT.

I wouldn't bother getting the built in power supply or AWG though, unless they are super cheap options.

I was under the impression that the FFT function was essentially the same between GDS-1000B, GDS-2000E, MSO, and MDO lines. No?

[nctnico]

No, for some reason GW Instek choose to make a seperate MDO2000 model which has a more fancy FFT.

[TimNJ]

No, for some reason GW Instek choose to make a seperate MDO2000 model which has a more fancy FFT.

Ah thanks for clarification. That’s interesting and a bit disappointing. Now to check pricing on MDO line..

[TimNJ]

$1400USD for MDO. $1150 for GDS. Includes AWG and advanced FFT/SA features.

That’s honestly not that bad for $250 more considering your average run of the mill AWG is between $200-300. And my current function generator is a 2MHz max analog GW Instek. Not sure how I feel about AWG embedded in the scope though.

[tautech]

GW Instek 1000B: "really horrible to use":

@10:30

Ah yes, that’s the video. Hmm that’s too bad. It’s definitely running old firmware. I wonder it anything has changed. Should also be noted that the other scopes are much more expensive, save the Rigol whose FFT is utterly useless.

Maybe the Siglent has a better FFT after all!

A quick look at SDS1004X-E FFT is @~6.45 in this vid:
https://youtu.be/Cwbwq-AKbPc

[TimNJ]

GW Instek 1000B: "really horrible to use":

@10:30

Ah yes, that’s the video. Hmm that’s too bad. It’s definitely running old firmware. I wonder it anything has changed. Should also be noted that the other scopes are much more expensive, save the Rigol whose FFT is utterly useless.

Maybe the Siglent has a better FFT after all!

A quick look at SDS1004X-E FFT is @~6.45 in this vid:
https://youtu.be/Cwbwq-AKbPc

Seems pretty good on the Siglent. I have only used scope FFT a handful of times, though, so I’m not sure what makes one FFT implementation better than another. Maybe you have an opinion on that?

[tautech]

Seems pretty good on the Siglent. I have only used scope FFT a handful of times, though, so I’m not sure what makes one FFT implementation better than another. Maybe you have an opinion on that?

C'mon, you know I've an opinion on everything. 

Simply it's just the processor's capability of crunching the data for FFT especially if you're comparing anything with older processors to these in the GW and X-E.

At one time I only had a DSO's to do FFT's and even before the X-E's none of the earlier Siglents were anything flash just as your 2104X at work is pretty ordinary but does the job. X-E's leave the older Siglents behind in this respect.
But now I have a spectrum analyser for this and you have a much much wider range of control over any of the input and display parameters.

You could if you wish dream up an FFT that you'd like to see and I'm sure some members can offer some DSO FFT screenshots.

I think you're almost at the point where you have to decide to address your curiosity or stick with a GUI/UI you already know reasonably well.

[TimNJ]

Seems pretty good on the Siglent. I have only used scope FFT a handful of times, though, so I’m not sure what makes one FFT implementation better than another. Maybe you have an opinion on that?

C'mon, you know I've an opinion on everything. 

Simply it's just the processor's capability of crunching the data for FFT especially if you're comparing anything with older processors to these in the GW and X-E.

At one time I only had a DSO's to do FFT's and even before the X-E's none of the earlier Siglents were anything flash just as your 2104X at work is pretty ordinary but does the job. X-E's leave the older Siglents behind in this respect.
But now I have a spectrum analyser for this and you have a much much wider range of control over any of the input and display parameters.

You could if you wish dream up an FFT that you'd like to see and I'm sure some members can offer some DSO FFT screenshots.

I think you're almost at the point where you have to decide to address your curiosity or stick with a GUI/UI you already know reasonably well.

Right. I understand the computational demands of FFT, but was just thinking about some of Dave's comments on usability of the FFT function in his roundup. Then again, I have learned to take Dave's opinions with a grain of salt. Additionally, FFT isn't the main priority here and regardless, it will be usable on either of these scopes. If I wind up needing a better frequency spectrum analysis tool in the future, I'll probably just buy a DSA. Thanks. Now time to make a decision.

[TimNJ]

Pulled the trigger on the GW Instek GDS-2074E.

Definitely had some last minute second thoughts, but am hoping that any sense of buyer's remorse/regret will evaporate once I begin to actually use the scope.

Thanks everyone for your input over the last couple of days. I'll keep you all posted. What is anyone interested in knowing about this scope? I can try my best to provide screenshots, explanations, etc.

[Fungus]

That is Dave's opinion and he just doesn't like GW Instek for some reason.

Dave junior is a fan though.