Hantek DSO2D10 vs Siglent SDS1104X-E

Specs side by side

Specs checked against manufacturer documentation and official Amazon listings. Siglent SDS1104X-E is hands-on tested by OhmSavvy; the Hantek DSO2D10 assessment is desk research. How we research.

Key differences

• →Bandwidth is identical: both are rated at 100MHz, so neither shows a fast edge more faithfully than the other on paper.
• →Both peak at 1 GSa/s and both give 500 MSa/s per channel with every channel on: two channels on the Hantek, four on the Siglent.
• →Channels: 2 on the Hantek against 4 on the Siglent, the biggest practical difference between them.
• →The Hantek has a built-in waveform generator (one channel, to 25 MHz); the Siglent has none built in, though Siglent sells a USB AWG option for its four-channel models.
• →Memory: with two channels on, the Hantek has 4 Mpts each; the Siglent keeps 7 Mpts per channel even with all four on. Siglent also states 100,000 wfm/s; Hantek doesn't state an update rate.
• →The SDS1104X-E carries our Hands-on Tested badge and a 4.8 rating; the Hantek DSO2D10 (4.3) assessment is desk research against Hantek's specifications.

Spec by spec

Most scope comparisons are decided by bandwidth. This one isn't. Both scopes are rated at 100MHz and both peak at 1 GSa/s, so on a single channel they are evenly matched. The charts below show where they part ways: how many signals you can watch together, how long each channel can record, and whether you also get a signal source. The Rigol DS1054Z appears in the bandwidth chart as a familiar 50MHz reference point.

The record-length chart is simple arithmetic: 4 million points at 500 MSa/s fill in 8 ms, and 7 million fill in 14 ms. That matters when you want one capture to hold a whole event, such as a burst of serial packets or a power-up sequence, and still zoom into individual edges afterwards. Both are generous for a hobby bench; the Siglent simply holds a longer window per channel while running twice as many.

Two ways to use 100MHz: a test loop or a full bus

The diagram shows the job each scope is shaped for. The Hantek can feed its own circuit: the generator output drives a filter or amplifier, channel 1 watches the input and channel 2 the output. The Siglent can't make a signal, but it can put a probe on every line of a four-wire bus, such as SPI's chip select, clock, MOSI and MISO, and capture them all on one trigger.

Notice what the top setup costs: once the Hantek's generator is driving a circuit, both of its inputs are spoken for by input and output, so there is no spare channel for a third node such as a supply rail. The bottom setup shows the opposite limit: the Siglent can see the whole bus, but if the circuit needs an external stimulus you must bring one, either a separate generator or Siglent's optional USB AWG.

What each one can and can't measure

Start with what they share. Rated bandwidth is the frequency at which a sine wave is shown about 3 dB low, roughly 70% of its true amplitude, so a scope reads a signal accurately only well below that figure. The common 3–5x rule says the scope's bandwidth should be three to five times the highest frequency you care about. At 100MHz, both are comfortable on signals up to roughly 20–33MHz: microcontroller clocks, PWM, UART, I2C and most SPI, audio, and the switching frequency of typical hobby power supplies. Square waves need more margin than sines because their edges carry harmonics well above the fundamental, so treat the lower end of that range as the safe limit for clean edges. Our guide to oscilloscope bandwidth explains the rule in more depth.

Sample rate is closer than it first looks. Both reach 1 GSa/s on one channel, which is ten samples per cycle of a 100MHz sine, and both drop to 500 MSa/s per channel with every input running: Hantek states this for its two channels, Siglent for its four. Five samples per cycle at 100MHz is still well above the Nyquist minimum of two. For what the GSa/s figure means in practice, see what GSa/s means.

The real dividing line is signal count. The Hantek can watch two things at once. That covers a lot: input against output of an amplifier, a PWM signal against its filtered result, a trigger pulse against a delayed response. It runs out when the problem involves three or more related signals, such as an SPI transaction or several supply rails coming up in sequence. Both scopes decode SPI, but the Hantek can only decode what its two probes reach, so a full four-wire transaction with chip select needs the Siglent.

The generator turns that around for analog work. To check a filter or amplifier you need a known input signal. With the Hantek, the built-in output (one channel, to 25 MHz) drives the circuit while the two channels compare input with output. A worked example: an RC low-pass with 1 kΩ and 10 nF has its corner at about 16 kHz (1 ÷ 2πRC). Step the generator from 1 kHz to 100 kHz and the output on channel 2 falls to about 70% of the input near 16 kHz, then keeps dropping. With the Siglent you would need a separate source to run the same test.

Waveform update rate is the one figure only one maker publishes. Siglent states up to 100,000 waveforms per second (400,000 in sequence mode), which helps a rare glitch show up on screen instead of falling into the dead time between captures. Hantek doesn't state an update rate for the DSO2D10, so we can't compare the two on intermittent-fault hunting.

Which should you buy?

Since the two front ends match, match the scope to how many signals you handle at once and whether you need to make one of them yourself.

For the wider field, see the beginner oscilloscope roundup, the oscilloscope buying guide, and our full Hantek DSO2D10 review and Siglent SDS1104X-E review. If you like the Hantek but don't need the generator, the Hantek DSO2C10 vs DSO2D10 comparison covers the same scope without it.

Frequently asked questions