The two instruments are not really comparable. The FACSVerse is a far superior instrument to the C6. It uses a bunch of new technology that BD has built to address usability (software) and reliability (hardware). The downside to the FACSVerse is that it had some issues when it first came to market, but I believe many of those issues have been ironed-out. The key features of the FACSVerse include a high level of optical filter quality assurance, such that the software can actually predict (with decent accuracy) the amount of compensation needed to correct for spectral overlap. In addition, the fluidics take a unique perspective on moving fluid; utilizing a vacuum system to pull fluid through the flow cell instead of a pressure system to push fluid throughout. One of the main advantages of this is the ability to use a variety of sample tubes/plates from which to collect samples. The C6 was designed to be a cheap instrument, and lives up to its expectations. It is by no means a poor instrument, it's just not very good. The FACSVerse was designed to showcase the next generation of BD engineering, and although that comes with a few growing pains, it really does allow for some very nice advantages. As with most instrument purchasing decisions, I highly recommend you run some of your samples with your panels of antibodies on both instrument to generate some real-world data and decide for yourself.

The two instruments are not really comparable. The FACSVerse is a far superior instrument to the C6. It uses a bunch of new technology that BD has built to address usability (software) and reliability (hardware). The downside to the FACSVerse is that it had some issues when it first came to market, but I believe many of those issues have been ironed-out. The key features of the FACSVerse include a high level of optical filter quality assurance, such that the software can actually predict (with decent accuracy) the amount of compensation needed to correct for spectral overlap. In addition, the fluidics take a unique perspective on moving fluid; utilizing a vacuum system to pull fluid through the flow cell instead of a pressure system to push fluid throughout. One of the main advantages of this is the ability to use a variety of sample tubes/plates from which to collect samples. The C6 was designed to be a cheap instrument, and lives up to its expectations. It is by no means a poor instrument, it's just not very good. The FACSVerse was designed to showcase the next generation of BD engineering, and although that comes with a few growing pains, it really does allow for some very nice advantages. As with most instrument purchasing decisions, I highly recommend you run some of your samples with your panels of antibodies on both instrument to generate some real-world data and decide for yourself.

I'm completely agree with the words of Ryan Duggan

It depends on what you want to do. I have had an Accuri for 4 years and love it. It is simple to use, inexpensive, and easy to train novices on. It is an excellent basic machine (4 color) with a large dynamic range for analysis, allowing the measurement of both very small and very large cells. The Facsverse is a much more complex machine doing up to eight colors with 3 lasers. If you want to know more about the Accuri you can contact me. I disagree with the prior comments. The Accuri is an excellent machine. I have been doing flow for over 25 years and used many machines and actually found the Accuri to be far superior for working with large cells such as macrophages.

I completely agree with Ryan Duggan.

Just few consideration more. Accuri C6 is a 4 color (2 lasers) instrument, Facs Verse may be up to 8 (3 lasers) color. So the choice should be addressed by the kind of flow experiments you plan to do. In other words, if you think to use multicolor (ie 5-8 color) protocols, obviously the Verse is the only possible choice. On the other hand, if you need flow cytometer only for simple and repetitive experiments C6 might be enough. Another very important issue is the amount of events you think you have to acquire for each tube. Verse is able to acquire and process millions of events, C6 do not.

Good choice and good luck.

I also have experience with the Accuri. We have had our Accuri since 2008 and it has been great. It is a very user friendly machine and has very little maintenance issues. It is a great machine to train students on. The major drawback is in its software, but I export files and analyze on FlowJo.

In addition to the excellent comments above, the decision has to be made based on what you to do (number of parameters to investigate at once, cell type of interest etc...). But I think having a machine with more channels is better as it allow you to look at different stuffs on precious samples. However, this comes with the cost as well, not only at purchase but also with the maintenance.

The basic problem of BD acuuri that you can not adjust the PMT voltage as per your experiments and cells, at least in case of instruments what BD are selling in India. So be sure that you do not need to change the PMT voltage. To me BD FACSVerse is better than BD acuuri. You may also check the Attune Acoustics Focusing Cytometer (http://www.invitrogen.com/site/us/en/home/Products-and-Services/Applications/Cell-Analysis/Flow-Cytometry/Flow-Cytometers/Attune-Acoustic-Focusing-Flow-Cytometer.html?CID=fl-attune), comparable price with BD acuuri BUT with adjustable PMT voltage.

We have a 3 laser Verse with automatic sample. I used both 2-laser Calibur and 3-laser cantoII. There is nothing like the Verse. It needs not special tubes (you can use eppendorf cups, 15 ml tubes, plates..). The software is complicated but Diva (the software of Canto II) was any better...You can also determine the concentration of your sample without calibration beads or calibrate fluorescece/compensate it is not necessary anymore (it is automatically done by cheking Quality Control with dedicated beads, that you have to use once a day)

I have used a few different flowcytometers and the facsverse is easily the best machine out of the lot. As with anything new there were a few bugs and the software takes a bit of getting used to.

Thank you all for your valuable comments and suggestions. I am using cancer cell lines for my study. I have used FACScaliber. It will be helpful if the user interface is similar to the Cell quest. One more thing, Is accuri generated files supported by any of windows based software?

Yes Accuri files are FCS3.0 so compatible with all programs that have been updated to accept the expanded range for all parameters.

Good pint added by Wiener. FCS 2 (Verse) is not compatible with free software like Flowing 2 etc.

FCS 3 is compatible with Flowing 2

Thank you all....

Dear Ractim. I recommend you BD FACSVerse. I have good experience with this.

The BD company is very serious, with a good service.

best

Eva Kovacs