CipherLab A2564S2BS0001 vs Honeywell 1962H-WC-CUP: Specification Comparison
Both the CipherLab A2564S2BS0001 and the Honeywell 1962H-WC-CUP are wireless handheld barcode scanners targeting mobile warehouse and general-purpose scanning environments. The core distinction is scan engine class: the CipherLab is a 1D linear imager, while the Honeywell Xenon XP 1952g is an area imager capable of reading both 1D and 2D symbologies. Buyers weighing these two are typically asking whether 2D read capability and drop resilience justify a step up from a purpose-built 1D Bluetooth scanner. Both share IP65 ratings and Bluetooth connectivity, making direct comparison relevant for procurement decisions.
In This Guide
- Which scanner covers the barcode formats your operation actually uses?
- How do these scanners hold up in demanding physical environments?
- Which scanner fits better into your wireless infrastructure and working distance requirements?
- Which should you choose: the A2564S2BS0001 or the 1962H-WC-CUP?
- Side-by-Side Specs
- FAQ
Which scanner covers the barcode formats your operation actually uses?
The CipherLab A2564S2BS0001 is a dedicated 1D linear imager supporting more than 15 linear symbologies including Code 39, Code 128, UPC/EAN/GS1-128, GS1 DataBar, Interleave 2 of 5, Codabar, Code 93, Code 11, ISBT-128, MSI, Plessey, Telepen, Matrix 2 of 5, Industrial 2 of 5, and Italian/French Pharmacodes. Its scan rate is specified at 578 scans per second across auto-sense and continuous modes, and minimum print contrast is 15%.
The Honeywell 1962H-WC-CUP uses an area imager engine that reads both 1D and 2D symbologies. Documented formats include UPC, Code 128, Code 39, QR Code, Data Matrix, PDF417, and Aztec. No scan rate in scans-per-second is provided in the supplied specifications for the Honeywell. Buyers whose workflows include QR codes, Data Matrix labels, or PDF417 documents will find the Honeywell's area imager to be the only option between the two; operations running exclusively on legacy 1D linear barcodes will find the CipherLab's deeper linear symbology list and documented 578-scan/sec throughput more directly specified.
How do these scanners hold up in demanding physical environments?
Both units carry an IP65 environmental rating, meaning both are certified against total dust ingress and water jets—suitable for dock, warehouse floor, and light outdoor use cases.
The Honeywell 1962H-WC-CUP additionally specifies a 2.0 m drop rating, providing a documented tolerance for accidental drops from working height. The CipherLab A2564S2BS0001 specs do not include a drop rating in the provided data. For environments where scanners are routinely handled at height—pick-and-pack, receiving docks, elevated shelving—the Honeywell's 2.0 m drop tolerance is a concrete, quantified advantage. The CipherLab's durability in drop scenarios cannot be assessed from the available specifications.
Which scanner fits better into your wireless infrastructure and working distance requirements?
The CipherLab A2564S2BS0001 connects via Bluetooth but the Bluetooth version is not specified in the provided data. Its documented scan range spans 3–10 cm (Code 39 3 mil) to 1.5–60 cm (20 mil), with the usable range depending on barcode density and print quality.
The Honeywell 1962H-WC-CUP specifies Bluetooth 4.2 explicitly, providing a known protocol version for IT infrastructure planning. Its working range is stated as 2.5 to 50.8 cm (1 to 20 inches). The Honeywell spec sheet also documents a PoE Class 2 attribute, though this is atypical for a handheld Bluetooth scanner and may relate to cradle or base station hardware; the provided data does not clarify this further. The CipherLab's maximum range of 60 cm (on 20 mil Code 39) exceeds the Honeywell's stated 50.8 cm upper bound, though direct comparison is limited because the Honeywell's range is not broken out by symbology density.
Which should you choose: the A2564S2BS0001 or the 1962H-WC-CUP?
Our take: The 1962H-WC-CUP is the stronger choice when operations require 2D barcode reading (QR, Data Matrix, PDF417, Aztec) or need a documented drop tolerance. Three concrete spec deltas drive this: (1) scan engine—the Honeywell reads 1D and 2D formats while the CipherLab is 1D only; (2) drop rating—the Honeywell specifies 2.0 m, the CipherLab provides no drop rating in available specs; (3) Bluetooth version—the Honeywell documents Bluetooth 4.2, the CipherLab's version is unspecified. Conversely, the A2564S2BS0001 is the better-specified choice for pure 1D environments: it documents 578 scans/sec throughput, a broader linear symbology list (15+ formats vs. 3 listed 1D formats for the Honeywell), and a 15% minimum print contrast figure useful for faded-label workflows. Both carry IP65. The Honeywell carries a 3-year warranty versus 2 years for the CipherLab. Choose the CipherLab for high-volume 1D-only lines; choose the Honeywell where 2D codes or ruggedization documentation are non-negotiable.
Side-by-Side Comparison
Spec-for-spec, from manufacturer data.
| Specification | CipherLab A2564S2BS0001 | Honeywell 1962H-WC-CUP |
|---|---|---|
| Product Type | 1D Linear Imager Scanner | Area Imager Scanner (1D/2D) |
| Series / Family | — | Xenon XP 1952g |
| Scan Engine | 1D Linear Imager | Area Imager (1D and 2D) |
| Connectivity | Bluetooth (version not specified) | Bluetooth 4.2 |
| IP Rating | IP65 | IP65 |
| Drop Rating | — | 2.0 m |
| Scan Rate | 578 scans/sec | — |
| Working / Scan Range | 1.5–60 cm (varies by density) | 2.5–50.8 cm |
| Min Print Contrast | 15% | — |
| Warranty | 2 years | 3 years |
| Color Options | Black, Register White | — |
| 1D Symbologies (documented) | Code 39, Code 128, UPC/EAN, GS1 DataBar, Codabar, Code 93, Code 11, ISBT-128, MSI, Plessey, Telepen, I 2of5, Matrix 2of5, Industrial 2of5, Italian/French Pharmacodes | UPC, Code 128, Code 39 |
| 2D Symbologies | None (1D only) | QR Code, Data Matrix, PDF417, Aztec |
| Scan Pattern | Auto-sense and continuous modes | — |
| Application | — | General purpose |
| PoE Class | — | Class 2 (spec noted; context unclear) |
Frequently Asked Questions
Which should you choose: the A2564S2BS0001 or the 1962H-WC-CUP?
The 1962H-WC-CUP is the stronger choice when operations require 2D barcode reading (QR, Data Matrix, PDF417, Aztec) or need a documented drop tolerance. Three concrete spec deltas drive this: (1) scan engine—the Honeywell reads 1D and 2D formats while the CipherLab is 1D only; (2) drop rating—the Honeywell specifies 2.0 m, the CipherLab provides no drop rating in available specs; (3) Bluetooth version—the Honeywell documents Bluetooth 4.2, the CipherLab's version is unspecified. Conversely, the A2564S2BS0001 is the better-specified choice for pure 1D environments: it documents 578 scans/sec throughput, a broader linear symbology list (15+ formats vs. 3 listed 1D formats for the Honeywell), and a 15% minimum print contrast figure useful for faded-label workflows. Both carry IP65. The Honeywell carries a 3-year warranty versus 2 years for the CipherLab. Choose the CipherLab for high-volume 1D-only lines; choose the Honeywell where 2D codes or ruggedization documentation are non-negotiable.
Can the CipherLab A2564S2BS0001 read QR codes or Data Matrix labels?
No. Based on the provided specifications, the A2564S2BS0001 is a 1D linear imager only. It does not support 2D symbologies such as QR Code, Data Matrix, PDF417, or Aztec. If your operation uses any 2D barcodes, the Honeywell 1962H-WC-CUP's area imager is the appropriate choice between these two models.
Which scanner has the longer warranty?
The Honeywell 1962H-WC-CUP carries a 3-year warranty per the provided specifications. The CipherLab A2564S2BS0001 is covered by a 2-year warranty. That is a one-year difference in documented coverage.
Is the CipherLab A2564S2BS0001 or the Honeywell 1962H-WC-CUP better suited to a high-throughput 1D scanning line?
For a pure 1D workflow, the CipherLab A2564S2BS0001 has the more detailed throughput specification: 578 scans per second in auto-sense and continuous modes, with scan range documented across three barcode densities (3 mil through 20 mil). The Honeywell's scan rate is not provided in the available specifications, making a direct throughput comparison impossible. If scan speed is a decision criterion, the CipherLab supplies the documented number; the Honeywell does not, based on provided data.
More Barcode Scanner Comparisons
- Zebra DS3678 vs Honeywell 520-36/48-H3
- Zebra DS3678 vs CipherLab A2564S2BS0001
- Zebra DS3678 vs Honeywell 1962H-WC-CUP
- Zebra DS3678 vs Socket Mobile CX4238-3326
- Zebra DS3678 vs Zebra DS3678
- Zebra DS3678 vs Zebra DS8178-SRSF007ZZWW
Barcode Scanner Buying Guides
Get a Second Opinion on Your Camera Choice
Share your site layout, coverage goals, and budget. Our team will validate the camera selection, flag anything we would change, and recommend products that match the use case.