Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Anritsu Oscilloscopes vs National Instruments (NI) Oscilloscopes comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Anritsu Oscilloscopes
Ranking in Oscilloscopes
8th
Average Rating
7.8
Number of Reviews
6
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
National Instruments (NI) O...
Ranking in Oscilloscopes
7th
Average Rating
8.6
Number of Reviews
10
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2025, in the Oscilloscopes category, the mindshare of Anritsu Oscilloscopes is 0.7%, down from 0.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of National Instruments (NI) Oscilloscopes is 0.8%, down from 1.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Oscilloscopes
 

Featured Reviews

RT
We use it to decide the materials which are best for PCB designs
We are able to determine losses associated with different types of materials. Thus, we are able to decide the materials which are best for any given design. The electrical measurements that this equipment is capable of measuring are the standard parameters. Therefore, it is mandatory for each company to have a vector network analyzer (VNA).
SeniorEn6bfd - PeerSpot reviewer
The integrated lateral view makes it easier to develop your test systems and test software flow
The application space that this solution targets is 5G and high-speed systems. 5G is where we are developing some chips to test whether it prequalifies for a necessary requirement before we embed it into our box. Then, in high-speed systems, we're still figuring out how exactly we're going to test this out, but it should be also on prequalification. We are not using this product to support connected devices for IoT development nor are we planning to going forward. We are measuring millimeter wave signals. My colleague deals with the automation of the test systems. The user interface is okay.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"We can extract signal loss, skew, DKDF... and the tool is very flexible."
"It gives you the capability to increase the Tap levels and voltage strength more than what you have in your signal."
"It supports the PAM-4 encoding scheme. We use that to do our PAM-4 receiver validation."
"The most valuable feature is its frequency range."
"The Pulse Pattern Generator (PPG) and Error Detector are co-located, which makes it easier to use because I can just probe it directly on the PCB."
"The user interface is easy, simple, and practical."
"The jitter function included into the system has helped me in terms of improving the capabilities of our product."
"It took us less than a week to get integrated into the solution, which is very fast."
"Most of the features are on the screen itself. The naming convention makes it very easy to understand what is needed."
"The user interface is absolutely great. It creates an easy working environment because it has well-integrated hardware and software. So, it is easy to use."
"The integrated lateral view makes it easier to develop your test systems and test software flow."
"It makes programming simpler."
"The learning curve was really fast, which was also the reason for saving a lot on the budget."
"The user interface is very good, easy to understand, and easy to operate."
"It helps us to save on our investment with a lot of the stuff that we buy, as we can find defects quickly."
 

Cons

"The user interface is a bit complicated because they have so many tabs. If they could simplify it, this would be helpful and appreciated."
"I would like to see them improve the software. The new version can be improved. It's not quite stable. It restarts a lot."
"I would like a better GUI with navigation. This should make it easier to compare to competitors, like Textronix or Keysight."
"Right now, it's a minimal tool. They could make it more dynamic by adding dynamic features, which could help us with doing effective analysis."
"Sometimes, the forms keep changing because of new product technology. If they could reduce the amount of change in the form, this would be good."
"The product's antennas and radar applications need improvement."
"I would like the frequency range to be extended because of the speed. Electronics are moving forward to higher speeds, so it's better to have higher frequencies."
"I would like more speed and a reduction in size."
"There is a learning curve. It takes one to two months to get acclimated to the tool."
"I would like to have more RF. They're going that way, but still there is some work that they have to do."
"I would like to see more of a tasking user base and documentation inside the instrument itself, rather than having to go online for it."
"It took a good year until I felt proficient using the product, as It is a complex program. Their newest version has a less steep learning curve, but back closer to 15 years ago, it was a lot less user-friendly."
"I would like to see them increase the productivity and auxiliary functions."
"The software has room for improvement."
"There is a learning curve. It might take a year if you're not well-versed with it."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It's very expensive equipment and cannot be upgraded after five years. If you buy equipment today, in five years, it won't be upgradeable. You have to upgrade it within the first five years that you buy it."
"Pricing is always expensive. It would be better if they lowered the price."
"Price-wise, it is much cheaper than its competitors."
"I think everyone gets a demo before purchasing."
"It is expensive, but I guess that is why it works."
"The pricing is costly."
"The first version of the product is always expensive, then once there is competition, it will be cheaper."
"They have an initial investment cost, which is quite high. But, along the way, there is so much behind it that the product is really invaluable."
"I would like more competitive pricing."
"It's reasonably priced for what we spend our money on in the lab. It's one of the lower-end purchases."
"The cost of the equipment has room for improvement. The pricing could improve."
"The pricing was good. Compared to the others, it was very good."
"It's a bit expensive. However, you get the entire package, not just the box. It's a box which supports older releases."
"These products are a very low-cost, effective alternative to traditional Big Iron ATE hardware."
"The price is a little steep. A lot of people, like our customers, use a different machine because of the price. The price has to come down a bit so we can do other tests without paying the equipment's high costs."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Oscilloscopes solutions are best for your needs.
849,963 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Government
19%
Legal Firm
14%
Comms Service Provider
12%
Financial Services Firm
7%
Legal Firm
34%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Computer Software Company
8%
Healthcare Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Also Known As

BERTWave Series
NI Oscilloscopes
 

Overview

Find out what your peers are saying about Anritsu Oscilloscopes vs. National Instruments (NI) Oscilloscopes and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
849,963 professionals have used our research since 2012.