Calculator Community > Casio Calculators

Heresy: The Other Side of Calc Programming

<< < (12/12)

kucalc:
I think the calculators themselves are even faster than the emulator. My fx-9860G is faster than the emulator. Or it could just be my computer (700MHz).

But you should take a look at the speed benchmarks for different calculators: http://www.hpmuseum.org/cgi-sys/cgiwrap/hpmuseum/articles.cgi?read=700

If you go to the bottom of the list for the fastest graphing calculator, it's says: FX-9860G C / SDK / Cross Compiler / Fast Mode x3.6 (20MHz->80MHz). It actually should say 14.74MHz->58.96MHz. But then that means the CASIO fx-9860's SH3 CPU @58.96MHz pwned the HP-50's ARM CPU @75MHz. o.o The ClassPad also uses SH3, but I think it's even clocked at a higher initial speed (29MHz I think...)

AaroneusTheGreat:
Yeah, that sounds right, it says it should run about 20 - 40 MHz
thats fast! 89 HW2 == ~12 MHz o.o

Ranman:
QuoteBegin-kucalc+14 Aug, 2007, 15:18-->QUOTE (kucalc @ 14 Aug, 2007, 15:18)IBut you should take a look at the speed benchmarks for different calculators: http://www.hpmuseum.org/cgi-sys/cgiwrap/hpmuseum/articles.cgi?read=700

According to that chart... The Casio FX-9860G (at default speed) is 10 times faster than the TI-89 HW2. And almost 37 times faster when overclocked. :gah:

Did you also notice the Casio FX-9860G (at default speed) is 40 times faster than the Commodore 64. :P

DJ Omnimaga:
that make a huge change from my old NES i think it wasn't even 1 MHz :D

AaroneusTheGreat:
Yes it's somewhere around there. Although it worked with amazingly small sprites and specialized RAM and LCD processing for games specifically, also it read the code from an outside card and only saved small amounts of information to them, so it's RAM was free to store runtime stuff.  Us calculator programmers face different challenges.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[*] Previous page