Comparison Between Fx-5800p And Fx-9860sd (programming Function)
Posted 15 March 2007 - 03:10 PM
I learn from my friend that FX-5800P is powerful than vintage FX-880P is it true? Is Fx-5800P or FX-9860SD an upgrading version of FX-880P?
Posted 15 March 2007 - 06:47 PM
A good point is that 5800 is half the weight of 9860, and its great for field engineer. Of course it cost half of 9860 too.
It is hard to compare 5800 and 880p, cause their Basic are different. But the built in library is very similar. In a way if you are looking for direct replacement of 880p then it is fx5800p.
If you can afford and do not mind the size and weigh (about 250g compare to 5800p 130g), then get the 9860, memory and speed are the keys:
Memory: 5800p = 28kb, 9860 = 1.5 mb flash and 64kb for main mem. You will not regret it.
Speed: Read this speed comparison from hpmuseum forum
FX-5800P: 234 sec
FX-7500G : 95.8 sec
FX-9860G : 21.3 sec
Posted 15 March 2007 - 10:12 PM
The FX-880P is a classical Basic Pocket Computer with 116 Programs in a libary, but not all of them are usefull. The FX-5800P has a Basic like structured formula language without line numbers. I prefer the FX-5800P as a good programmable calculator with a high contrast display for math. But if you want to program things like string manipulation or you prefer standard Basic the FX-880P is the better choice.
As samuel wrote, the FX-9860G is the much better calculator. Is has graphics, a very nice display, a language like the FX-5800P but more powerfull and it is extremly fast. The question is what you need.
You can have a look at the languages hier: http://www.hpmuseum....es.cgi?read=700
The FX-5800P has a Getkey function.
I have updated the table:
FX-5800P 227 sec
FX-880P ? sec (I guess around 150 sec)
FX-7500G 90.4 sec
FX-9860G 17.3 sec
and thank to kucalc:
FX-9860G Fast Mode 9.07 sec
Posted 16 March 2007 - 05:49 PM
BTW Merlin, I have made a mistake - the FX-5800P weighs only 92g.
Wat do you think of the 5800P personally? I think FX-5800P is designed to replace all the previous programmable models like FX-603P, 4500PA, 4800P, and FX-880P from the memory, features and functions included. Eveything looks very good as an engineering calculator.
However I have couple of things to say about the model:
- It too slow according to the test
- just 28KB for a programmable calc? It is obviously not a calc for school exam which cap the allowable memory size.
Wish Casio will improved on the speed and give the memory a needed kick. If this is a model to replace 880p and 4800p then its better be very good.
Posted 16 March 2007 - 11:15 PM
The FX-603P is one of the best keystroke programmable calcs with 6144 steps but the programming languages ist not very suitable for complex problems.
The FX-4500PA is very slow and have only 1103 bytes for programming with a very simple formula language. So this calc is unpractical, if you want to make a program library for it.
The FX-4800P has only 4.5 kbyte of RAM, thats also not enough. There is a FX-4850P and this calc is very similar to the FX-5800P with 28 kbyte RAM. But the FX-5800P has a much better high contrast LCD, better keys and a structured formula language for complex programming. One drawbeck is the access speed to arrays making this calc slow in comparison and not have the possibility of PC link. But overall it's a very good programmable calculator if you don't need graphics or high speed.
I have an idea for Casio: FX-5900P with 1 MB RAM, PC link and SH3 CPU.
Posted 17 March 2007 - 05:02 PM
I have idea for Casio: FX-5900P with 1 MB RAM, PC link and SH3 CPU.
You are a crazy man !!
But I concur, lets tell Casio to call it FX-5800P SE with 1 MB RAM, 1MB Flash, PC link and SH3 CPU.
Give it special package and priced it 3 times more , a collector item.
But seriously, the speed is an issue if say you are using this for work. Waiting for complex calculation to complete in 20 sec compare to 3 sec on the 9860 is something to consider about. Even 9860 is heavier and cost twice as much, the speed and memory size are attractive for a professional engineer for example.
Posted 19 March 2007 - 07:32 PM
One reason that calculators are slow depends to the programming language. Look at the differences of that calculators in the table with more than one on-calc language like PC-G850V, Z-1GRA or PB-2000C.
The hardware of the CFX-9850GB+ is faster than the FX-7000G, but because of not having arrays anymore you have to use a matrix instead that makes the execution slower. I guess with the program of FX-9860GSD it takes about 110-120 sec.
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users