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

Keysight Oscilloscopes vs RIGOL 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

Keysight Oscilloscopes
Ranking in Oscilloscopes
4th
Average Rating
8.4
Number of Reviews
23
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
RIGOL Oscilloscopes
Ranking in Oscilloscopes
2nd
Average Rating
8.0
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2025, in the Oscilloscopes category, the mindshare of Keysight Oscilloscopes is 12.3%, down from 13.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of RIGOL Oscilloscopes is 20.7%, down from 22.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Oscilloscopes Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
RIGOL Oscilloscopes20.7%
Keysight Oscilloscopes12.3%
Other67.0%
Oscilloscopes
 

Featured Reviews

AC
The technical support ecosystem is what really makes it good.
Because they're such a big industry standard name, their products are standardized across many customers, which is why people own these products. The customer support is very good. If you need an application to do any measurement, you can easily get a hold of people to help you with it. This is a whole ecosystem. The user interface is top-notch in the industry.
JP
The most valuable feature would be the bandwidth
It is a general purpose scope with 4-channel 300 MHz.  The application space that this solution targets is the embedded system of my products. Typically, the signals that we are measuring are digital, Bluetooth Low Energy (BLE), wireless, and Zigbee The most valuable feature would be the…

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The user interface has never been better. They improved it a few years ago with a more modern oscilloscope interface and it's easier to use, even for more junior people in our lab."
"The customer support is very good. If you need an application to do any measurement, you can easily get a hold of people to help you with it. This is a whole ecosystem."
"Because they're such a big industry standard name, their products are standardized across many customers, which is why people own these products."
"Before silicon came back, our customers' performance was affected. Using these tools, we are able to deliver performance to our customers."
"The user interface is nice. It describes the output well, so it's easy to use."
"The technical support is good, and it has very strong customer support. They sent an engineer to us who gave us some training and tutorials."
"The user interface is very good, very graphical. It provides a lot of help in using and operating it."
"It breaks down all the parameters that we need to look at."
"The most valuable feature would be the bandwidth."
 

Cons

"The user interface has a load of features that come with it, which is why it is an eight out of ten."
"Their GUI is not the best. They need to improve on that. I think their software team needs to put in a little bit more work on how they are presenting the application on the scope."
"If the simulation runs for a long time, it will suddenly crash. If they can debug that, the product would be better."
"I would like them to build in more high-speed functions, such as FEC or PCIe, built into the array. PERT to be built-in for more specific product call. These would make our lives much easier."
"Some of the models have only two ports. It takes much longer to use a two-port. If they had a four-port, it would be much better."
"I would like to see better post-processing data utility tools like a de-embedding."
"There is room for improvement with some of the features of the scope. I would like them to make it a bit more simplistic... For example, if I want to look at what the total jitter is, they should make it simpler to find that, with different tabs."
"While the user interface is good with respect to instrumentation, but with respect to documentation, I do not like it. Its documentation is slightly bad. It was not organized properly. The way it's organized is very difficult to understand, so it takes lot of time to search for one thing in particular."
"The memory needs improvement."
"I had to change the probes to higher frequency probes."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The pricing is very expensive, but with leading technology, nothing is cheap."
"The pricing is very expensive."
"They're not cheap."
"The pricing is good for what they offer."
"The price is affordable for us, but for smaller companies, probably not."
"Keysight is on the high side. If they could make the price lower without sacrificing the quality that would be great."
"The major factor influencing the decision-makers is the price."
"It's expensive, but the quality matters."
"For the 4-channel big display, you have to upgrade to 500 MHz."
"The pricing was good."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Oscilloscopes solutions are best for your needs.
869,771 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
17%
Legal Firm
9%
University
9%
Computer Software Company
6%
Comms Service Provider
13%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Educational Organization
8%
University
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business5
Midsize Enterprise3
Large Enterprise18
No data available
 

Also Known As

InfiniiVision Series, Infiniium Series
7000 Series, MSO5000 Series, 1000Z Series, DS6000 Series, 4000 Series, 2000 Series
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Nokia Bell Labs
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Siglent, RIGOL Technologies, Tektronix and others in Oscilloscopes. Updated: October 2025.
869,771 professionals have used our research since 2012.