NASA has proven you can cut costs by ignoring details and testing with rather disastrous results. Gary and Raoul's comments above seem to indicate the Beagle team has not studied their space history.

The Rover's Analytical instruments are: Pancam (a camera), Mini-TES, Microscopic Imager, Mössbauer and the APXS spectrometers, The Rock Abrasion Tool (a.k.a the RAT) can be used to scrape away the outer layers of a rock and has a function similar to the Beagle's Mole of enabling tests beneath the surface.

Beagle's instruments seem to be similar based on your links with slightly different strengths and weaknesses. In that aspect I think they are comparable. However, the mobility of the Rovers is a huge difference in both their cost and value in my opinion. We'll see which if any actually get to use their instruments in about a year. It seems to me Beagle will be far better at finding life and the Rovers will be far better at deciphering Mars' geological history. If Beagle picks the wrong spot to find life its whole mission may be nearly a waste while the Rover's won't.

From: http://athena.cornell.edu/the_mission/instruments.html
Pancam (a camera), Mini-TES (an infrared spectrometer) will survey the scene around the rover and look for the most interesting rocks and soils.

Three more instruments -- a Microscopic Imager and two spectrometers, the Mössbauer and the APXS -- can be placed against these rock and soil targets to learn about them in greater detail. The Rock Abrasion Tool (a.k.a the RAT) can then be used to scrape away the outer layers of a rock

Regards,
Mark