Unfortunately not.
Cls
0->A
While A<1000
A+1->A
Black Locate 1,1,A
WendTi 84+ SEClrhome
for(A,0,1000
disp A
end
PrizmCode: [Select]Cls
For 0 -> A To 1000
Black "A
Next
How do you set the increment to something other than +1?PrizmCode: [Select]Cls
For 0 -> A To 1000
Black "A
Next
Optimized for ya ;)
For 1000 ->A To 0 Step -1Also I optimized the TI code to use output instead of disp and now the TI-84+ SE finished the loop while the Prizm(with optimized for loop) was only on 740. The while loop on the Prizm though is just barely slower than the for loop
It seems weird, but if you don't give a color command in a basic draw instruction the default color is green. Also a ran a speed test on the Prizm basic vs. a TI 84+ SE on basic. When the Prizm finished the 84 was only up to 230. I have yet to figure out the for loop on the Prizm.Weird about the color. Nice to see loops are faster on the Prizm, though. Did you try with For instruction?
PrizmCode: [Select]ClsTi 84+ SE
0->A
While A<1000
A+1->A
Black Locate 1,1,A
WendCode: [Select]Clrhome
for(A,0,1000
disp A
end
Weird about the color. Nice to see loops are faster on the Prizm, though. Did you try with For instruction?I did try the for instruction, but it is only a little faster than a while loop. After optimizing the 84's code the Prizm was actually slower by about 25%.
Sorry if this was already answered, but do we know the speed and type of processor that the Prizm has?SuperH 3, running at 29 MHz (speed can be increased).
Sorry if this was already answered, but do we know the speed and type of processor that the Prizm has?SuperH 3, running at 29 MHz (speed can be increased).
I see. Hopefully the language is not extremly slow either. I certainly hope it's not like the Algebra FX series.Weird about the color. Nice to see loops are faster on the Prizm, though. Did you try with For instruction?I did try the for instruction, but it is only a little faster than a while loop. After optimizing the 84's code the Prizm was actually slower by about 25%.
From what I remember, it was a bit above 100 MHz when maxed out. That said, 29 is still better than 6, though. :PSorry if this was already answered, but do we know the speed and type of processor that the Prizm has?SuperH 3, running at 29 MHz (speed can be increased).
How much can it be increased? 29 MHz is SO SLOW!
Sorry if this was already answered, but do we know the speed and type of processor that the Prizm has?SuperH 3, running at 29 MHz (speed can be increased).
How much can it be increased? 29 MHz is SO SLOW!
| Bit | 15 | 14 | 13 | 12 | 11 | 10 | 9 | 8 | 7 | 6 | 5 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 0 |
| Bit controlled | C1 | A1 | B1 | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | C2 | C3 | A2 | A3 | B2 | B3 |
| " allows custom classes, but you would still need your own css. Maybe it has a style attribute. Anyway, The ceiling of 200 is probably as fast as the processor could go itself. Controlled is probably 178. I'm not entirely sure, but I think it's just an rounded-up answer. The only way to test that would be to hook it up to a clock running at 200, right? |
Or we could have it perform some counting function and record how long it takes. It'd be interesting to see what happens if you set the Frequency to 0x111b instead of the maximum of 0x101b./me seconds Qwerty.55's nomination
/me nominates FinaleTI's Prizm.
Yep, it does. I'd hope so, at least. The BRK command will turn the processor off until the next interrupt O.OHey, do you have a command list? And possibly their hex equates?
How do you set the increment to something other than +1?PrizmCode: [Select]Cls
For 0 -> A To 1000
Black "A
Next
Optimized for ya ;)
I'm guessingCode: [Select]For 1000 ->A To 0 Step -1Also I optimized the TI code to use output instead of disp and now the TI-84+ SE finished the loop while the Prizm(with optimized for loop) was only on 740. The while loop on the Prizm though is just barely slower than the for loop
Sorry if this was already answered, but do we know the speed and type of processor that the Prizm has?SuperH 3, running at 29 MHz (speed can be increased).
How much can it be increased? 29 MHz is SO SLOW!
It can be increased up to 6 times the base frequency, which is 178 MHz (although the manufacturer claims it has a ceiling of 200 MHz). You do this by manipulating the frequency control register, which is a two byte register controlling the internal clock frequency ratio, the peripheral clock frequency ratio, and the frequency multiplier. Each of those attributes is given three bits and I'll designate them A1,2,3, B1,2,3, and C1,2,3 respectively, where the lowest number signifies the most significant bit.
<snip>
The nspire has "spoiled" us. If it had never came out, we would be thinking of 29mhz as fast compared to the 84+.Sorry if this was already answered, but do we know the speed and type of processor that the Prizm has?SuperH 3, running at 29 MHz (speed can be increased).
How much can it be increased? 29 MHz is SO SLOW!
Sadly this is how slow Casio BASIC is. However, Locate is much faster than Output() and it has more functions than the Nspire, so I guess that's a start. I wish it was faster, though.How do you set the increment to something other than +1?PrizmCode: [Select]Cls
For 0 -> A To 1000
Black "A
Next
Optimized for ya ;)
I'm guessingCode: [Select]For 1000 ->A To 0 Step -1Also I optimized the TI code to use output instead of disp and now the TI-84+ SE finished the loop while the Prizm(with optimized for loop) was only on 740. The while loop on the Prizm though is just barely slower than the for loop
So... are you saying that TI BASIC @ 15MHz is faster than the Casio BASIC @ 29MHz?
All of the sudden, I'm not very impressed... but I will wait for more data.
The processor starts failing to read correctly from RAM. I'd assume that means you're going to crash something.Ok, but I am more curious at which speed the calc can continue functioning correctly.
The processor starts failing to read correctly from RAM. I'd assume that means you're going to crash something.Ok, but I am more curious at which speed the calc can continue functioning correctly.
very true. after all, if you have a game like Jump! on your calculator on that speed, you'd likely need to carry around a bag full of batteries(not that most of us don't carry around extras anyway)You don't carry an extra bag of batteries with you!? O.O
EDIT: also, another worry is the LCD. that could break if you push it too hard.
of course not, but a few(a set) stay in my backpack at all times.very true. after all, if you have a game like Jump! on your calculator on that speed, you'd likely need to carry around a bag full of batteries(not that most of us don't carry around extras anyway)You don't carry an extra bag of batteries with you!? O.O
EDIT: also, another worry is the LCD. that could break if you push it too hard.
I hope you lost nothing, though. O.OI thank the man who invented rechargeable batteries. I have 8, so I always have a set to switch out when I'm at home.
I remember during my 2002-03 coding craze (when I coded 10 hours a day, even on school days) my batteries died once and I had no money to buy new ones. I was bored to death for 2 days X.x