Calculators Speed Comparison -- Fx-3650Pii Port

11 replies to this topic

#1 frankmar98

frankmar98

Casio Freak

• Moderator
• 127 posts
• Gender:Male
• Location:Spain
• Interests:Science, programming

• Calculators:
CFX-9970G
Graph 90+E (fx-GC50)
fx-9860G SD
HP Prime
TI-84+ CE-T
x2 TI-83+
TI-81
fx-4800p, fx-3650PII
fx-991SPX, fx-991ES PLUS, fx-100W

Posted 03 March 2016 - 01:49 PM

Hello,

I´ve translated the benchmark code to the fx-3650pII language, and the benchmark is completed in 73 seconds. This calculator is uncapable of execute nested loops, so I´ve programmed 1 loop, and 1 label + 1 conditional + 1 increment + 1 goto to create the other loop.

This calculator is very rare in Europe, but I´m in love with it.

The code is:

```ClrMemory:Lbl 1:1.0000001->A:A->B:For 1->X To 27:AxA->A:B^(2.01)->B:Next:D+1->D:If D<=10:Then Goto 1:IfEnd:A(output triangle)B(output triangle):
```

Regards from Spain

#2 frankmar98

frankmar98

Casio Freak

• Moderator
• 127 posts
• Gender:Male
• Location:Spain
• Interests:Science, programming

• Calculators:
CFX-9970G
Graph 90+E (fx-GC50)
fx-9860G SD
HP Prime
TI-84+ CE-T
x2 TI-83+
TI-81
fx-4800p, fx-3650PII
fx-991SPX, fx-991ES PLUS, fx-100W

Posted 13 April 2016 - 02:20 PM

Hello,

I tried the benchmark on my new Casio fx-9750GII, and it takes 3,25s (chronometred with Casio CA-53W calculator watch).

Results:

A=674529.1121

B= 4669416.333

```10=>J
Lbl 2
1.0000001=>A
A=>B
27=>I
Lbl 1
A*A=>A
B^2.01=>B
Dsz I
Goto 1
Dsz J
Goto 2
A(output triangle)
B(output triangle)
```

Edited by frankmar98, 16 April 2016 - 05:31 PM.

#3 Forty-Two

Forty-Two

Casio Overlord

• Deputy
• 528 posts
• Gender:Male
• Location:Well, The sign says "You are here"...

• Calculators:
Casio fx-CG10 Prizm
Casio fx-9860GII
TI-84+ SE

Posted 13 April 2016 - 07:54 PM

Hi, please don't necropost. If you have something new to say, create a new topic and link to the old one instead.

I have split this post off from the original thread.

#4 Viliami

Viliami

• Moderator
• 95 posts
• Gender:Male
• Location:New Zealand
• Interests:C++ - OpenGL,SDL
Python - Pygame
Java - SFML
C - Casio SDK

• Calculators:
FX-9750 GII upgraded to FX-9860 GII

Posted 14 April 2016 - 01:54 AM

Wow, that is a huge gap.  73s vs 3.25s

#5 frankmar98

frankmar98

Casio Freak

• Moderator
• 127 posts
• Gender:Male
• Location:Spain
• Interests:Science, programming

• Calculators:
CFX-9970G
Graph 90+E (fx-GC50)
fx-9860G SD
HP Prime
TI-84+ CE-T
x2 TI-83+
TI-81
fx-4800p, fx-3650PII
fx-991SPX, fx-991ES PLUS, fx-100W

Posted 14 April 2016 - 06:17 PM

The Casio fx-9750GII, is very powerfull,

I use it to solve Chemical equilibrium equations in class before the professor,

Arrenhius Equations,

And very big linear systems

And it does it very fast

In the other part, the fx-3650pII, takes so much time to solve definite integrals, but it is a tiny, low-consume and solar programmable calculator

Sorry for necropost, since now, I won´t do it.

Regards

Edited by frankmar98, 14 April 2016 - 06:22 PM.

• Viliami likes this

#6 frankmar98

frankmar98

Casio Freak

• Moderator
• 127 posts
• Gender:Male
• Location:Spain
• Interests:Science, programming

• Calculators:
CFX-9970G
Graph 90+E (fx-GC50)
fx-9860G SD
HP Prime
TI-84+ CE-T
x2 TI-83+
TI-81
fx-4800p, fx-3650PII
fx-991SPX, fx-991ES PLUS, fx-100W

Posted 27 April 2016 - 01:58 PM

I ran the test in a fx-9750G (first model) (POWER GRAPHIC, 32KB) I bought it for 3€ (3.4\$) in a second-hand market.

It takes 13.06 seconds

Results:

A=674529.1097

B=4669408.348

The results are a bit different (because of the precision)

#7 frankmar98

frankmar98

Casio Freak

• Moderator
• 127 posts
• Gender:Male
• Location:Spain
• Interests:Science, programming

• Calculators:
CFX-9970G
Graph 90+E (fx-GC50)
fx-9860G SD
HP Prime
TI-84+ CE-T
x2 TI-83+
TI-81
fx-4800p, fx-3650PII
fx-991SPX, fx-991ES PLUS, fx-100W

Posted 18 August 2016 - 04:58 PM

Tested in an ancient TI-81 (Zilog Z80 8 bits @ 2MHz). It is a beautiful machine.

18,2 seconds

Results:

674530.318

4669329.224

I encourage you to benchmark your rare / old calculators, for comparision.

```10→J
Lbl 2
1.0000001→A
A→B
27→I
Lbl 1
A*A→A
B^2.01->B
DS<(I,1
Goto 1
DS<(J,1
Goto 2
Disp A
Disp B
```

Edited by frankmar98, 19 August 2016 - 11:33 AM.

#8 giraffe

giraffe

Newbie

• Members
• 2 posts

• Calculators:
fx-9750G PLUS

Posted 09 October 2016 - 02:22 AM

fx-9750G PLUS

A=674529.109665355
B=469408.34751335

Ran it 10 times: 14.00, 13.94, 13.86, 13.95, 13.61, 13.92, 13.77, 13.93, 13.91, 13.92.
The mean was 13.881 s.

edit: newlines

Edited by giraffe, 09 October 2016 - 02:23 AM.

#9 frankmar98

frankmar98

Casio Freak

• Moderator
• 127 posts
• Gender:Male
• Location:Spain
• Interests:Science, programming

• Calculators:
CFX-9970G
Graph 90+E (fx-GC50)
fx-9860G SD
HP Prime
TI-84+ CE-T
x2 TI-83+
TI-81
fx-4800p, fx-3650PII
fx-991SPX, fx-991ES PLUS, fx-100W

Posted 22 May 2018 - 04:20 PM

Graph 90+E / fx-CG50:

(1,5 +/- 1)s

Very good speed, it is a 2017 model.

#10 foroplus

foroplus

Newbie

• Members
• 12 posts
• Gender:Male
• Location:Spain

• Calculators:
Casios: FX4000P, FX6300G, FX7000G, FX7000GA, FX7700G, FX9750G, FX9950G, FX9860GII.
Casio Pocket: PB80, PB100, PB100F, PB110, FX702P, FX801P, FX-700P, FX-802P, PB700, PB750, PB750PF, PB720, PB720PF, PB410, FX730P, FX850P, FX880P, VX4.

Posted 23 May 2018 - 07:59 AM

Nice to see this calculator benchmarking test.

I use other tests, but always am interested in this kind of stuff.

I saw kind of this test first on this page http://www.hpmuseum....hread-1521.html , but they measure only precision, not the time needed (performance).

M

My main text is http://www.thimet.de...erformance.html

Edited by foroplus, 23 May 2018 - 08:04 AM.

#11 pan.gejt

pan.gejt

Casio Freak

• Members
• 163 posts
• Gender:Male
• Location:CZ

• Calculators:
.

Posted 23 May 2018 - 10:19 AM

Summation based benchmark for calculators

http://www.hpmuseum....ight=comparison

#12 slugrustle

slugrustle

Newbie

• Members
• 6 posts
• Gender:Not Telling

• Calculators:
fx-5800P
fx-9860GII SD

Posted 24 November 2018 - 04:40 PM

Using the code

```10➔J:
Lbl 2:
1.0000001➔A:
A➔B:
27➔I:
Lbl 1:
A×A➔A:
B^(2.01)➔B:
Dsz I:
Goto 1:
Dsz J:
Goto 2:
A◢
B◢
```

on the fx-5800P, I clocked a 24.4 second runtime and A = 674529.1097, B = 4669415.349.

Edit: Takes about 3.2 seconds on an fx-9860GII SD. A = 674529.1121, B = 4669416.333, essentially the same as your results on the fx-9750GII.

Edited by slugrustle, 24 November 2018 - 04:50 PM.

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users