A89: TI89 ROM vs. HP49 ROM

[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]

A89: TI89 ROM vs. HP49 ROM


Hi, I recently got my 89, and was wondering a couple of things.  First I 
like to know whet is going on on the other side of the road.  When HP came 
out with the 49, I was curious.  In the FAQ at hpcalc, it said that the 3d 
graphing was faster then the 89.  I wondered how this could be, considering 
that the 49's processor is only a 4bit, 4mhz Saturn.  I found it hard to 
believe, so I emailed the author of hpcalc's FAQ.  Here is his response:
>>me
>response

>Sorry for the delayed response, but I had to get some figures from HP (they 
>had to try your example on a >prototype) in order to answer your question.

>>First, for number 3.1, you said that the 49 can plot 3d graphs faster than 
>>any other calc.  I was wondering >>exactly what equation you used?

>It's faster for ANY equation that the HP49 can plot.  You have to see it to 
>believe it...it's amazing what a 4 >MHz CPU can do with optimized software.

>>z1=(x^3*y-y^3*x)/390

>That's a rather flat surface...maybe you shouldn't have divided by 390 and 
>it would look cooler :)

>About 6 seconds to calculate, and then it rotates it in real time around 10 
>frames per second on any of the >X, Y, or Z axes.

>>When calculating 100!*100! were you using the calculator in RPN or 
>>Algebraic mode?

>It doesn't matter: same speed.  The 2.5 seconds figure is to calculate 
>100!, then calculate 100! a second >time, and then multiply the two 
>numbers.  Of course, the quickest way to do it would be *100! DUP* but 
> >that would be cheating (only calculating 100! once).  The 2.5 seconds 
>includes the time it takes for the >display to update with the number.  It 
>actually only takes about 1.5 seconds for the computation.

>Regards,

>Eric Rechlin
>Bismarck, ND, USA
>eric@hpcalc.org
>http://www.hpcalc.org/

As you can see, the graphing is considerably faster, go ahead and try the 
sample equation on your 89.
Obviously HP has had some excellent programmers working for them, but enough 
to make up 28bits and 6mhz?  My next thought was that since the major speed 
improvements on the HP49 came from rewriting the ROM completely in Assembly, 
maybe TI's ROM wasn't written in Assembler.  Dux Gregis said:

>What they would most likely have to do is look at the assembly code 
>generated from their C source

So the 89's ROM was written in C?!

OK, here is my main questions: was the 89's ROM written in C?  Will Version 
2.00 be written in assembly?  What will be the major changes in Version 
2.00?  If Version 2.00 isn't going to be written in Assembly, will there be 
some functions written in assembler i.e. 3d graphing.

Thanks for your time

Josh Cunningham





_______________________________________________________________
Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.msn.com
Follow-Ups: