Agilent 1260 vs. Waters Acquity UPLC

[BHolmes]

Our lab is looking to acquire a new UHPLC system and we are divided between the Agilent 1260 and Waters Acquity UPLC. Any reason(s) why one system is better over the other?

[LCbob]

First off its 1290 for the UPLC. I believe the 1260 is the 600Bar model. There are several different versions of these models as well.

You could give them some samples to analyse and make a decision that way. Also check the service support reputation for your country / region.

Generally though both are good and generally all the earlier issues have been ironed out. The 1290 is easier to support as the parts are freely available and are not too expensive.

What data system are you looking to use?

[HPLCaddict]

...and be aware that there are actually two different versions of Waters Acquity out there: H-class and I-class.

[darthcolvin]

We have both systems in house here, the Agilent UHPLC is a 1290 and our Waters systems are Acquity H class. Both systems are comparable in terms of reliability as long as they are treated properly. I agree with LCbob that the 1290 is generally easier to maintain if you have to do the maintenance yourself. If you were to hold a gun to my head and make me choose one I would say I prefer the Acquity H class system over the 1290 mainly because I like the integrated e-cord system that Waters uses which records the history of the column on a chip permanently attached to the Waters columns. The 1290 we have has a somewhat similiar setup, but the "column tags" it uses are not permanently attached to the columns which has given us problems.

I wish I could give you a cut and dry answer, but the bottom line is both are excellent products. You'll need to look into support in your area and also who's willing to give you more bang for your buck.

[BHolmes]

Everyone - Thank you for replying to my post! We have instruments from both manufacturers and have mixed reviews for each one. We just need to see which vendor will give us the most bang for our buck, thanks Darthcolvin! Our lab is in a rural part of Washington State, so service is going to be similar between the two. I think the biggest factors for us are the ruggedness and reliability of each system.

@LCbob - thank you for correcting me on the model number, so many out there - hard to keep track As for data systems we are looking at AB Sciex Cliquid and MultiQuant.

@Darthcolvin - I also really love Waters ecord technology, so nice to have a record of EVERY sample set, injection, etc... that stays with the column - not in some logbook that you have to maintain.

[cgssekm]

Our laboratory is caught between the choice of a tunable UV (TUV) detector of Acquity H-Class UHPLC vs PDA (PhotoDiode array) detector. Is there any advise on the latest QDa Mass detector from Waters ?

Is there any advise on the key difference and recommendation ?

Cgssekm

[rwang]

Our laboratory is caught between the choice of a tunable UV (TUV) detector of Acquity H-Class UHPLC vs PDA (PhotoDiode array) detector. Is there any advise on the latest QDa Mass detector from Waters ?

Is there any advise on the key difference and recommendation ?

Cgssekm

I have not used the Acquity TUV (all the UPLCs are fitted with PDAs in my workplace), but from my experience with previous generation detectors (Waters 2487, 996/2996) the TUVs are generally more sensitive (higher S/N ratio). Of course PDA can give you spectral data which is useful for method development. Also PDA can chew through a lot of disk space if you have the 3D channel enabled (depending on run time and sampling rate), though it is hardly a problem nowadays.

[cgssekm]

thank you for pointing out the key difference, on PDA being more useful for method development vs Tunable UV being more sensitive with S/N ratio.