So, I bought a 41CV

[Garth Wilson]

(01-21-2018 01:58 AM)hth Wrote:  [quote='Maximilian Hohmann' pid='89187' dateline='1516478641']
I think the HP-41 runs about 10-15% faster than the 15C in raw performance. Probably noticeable when compared next to each other, but hardly any huge difference.

IIRC, the 15c took 40 seconds to invert an 8x8 real matrix, and the 41 with the Advantage module took 20, the HP-71 with Math module took 3 or 3.5 seconds, and the 50g had no visible delay. I tried it on the TI-59 with the stock library module, and after 15 minutes I gave up and turned it off.

[hth]

(01-21-2018 04:47 AM)Garth Wilson Wrote:  

(01-21-2018 01:58 AM)hth Wrote:  [quote='Maximilian Hohmann' pid='89187' dateline='1516478641']
I think the HP-41 runs about 10-15% faster than the 15C in raw performance. Probably noticeable when compared next to each other, but hardly any huge difference.

IIRC, the 15c took 40 seconds to invert an 8x8 real matrix, and the 41 with the Advantage module took 20, the HP-71 with Math module took 3 or 3.5 seconds, and the 50g had no visible delay. I tried it on the TI-59 with the stock library module, and after 15 minutes I gave up and turned it off.

I stand corrected.

I judged it from memory and looking into it now, the HP-41 can really be twice as fast.

Wow, it makes me even more impressed by the HP-16C, which currently outperforms my Ladybug ROM in some cases, though there are cases where the opposite it true. On the HP-41 side I have the benefit of more raw CPU power, but is hampered by the overhead of the more flexible (complicated) operating system and memory system.

A challenge to tend to at some point...

Håkan

[aurelio]

(01-21-2018 02:53 AM)Joe Horn Wrote:  Don't forget the Topcat series, which are also pocket calculators (for sufficiently large pockets).

and sufficiently "deep" pockets as written in a previous post

[TheKaneB]

Will the Time module let me go back in time and have my money back?

Anyway, for me the speed is somewhat important, because I like to experiment with programming a lot, so if I have quicker results it means that I can do more experiments in the same timespan.
However speed for me is very low in my priority list, (in order: keyboard quality, display, keyboard layout, user interface, number of functions, programming constructs, and then speed)

[Massimo Gnerucci]

(01-21-2018 02:53 AM)Joe Horn Wrote:  

(01-21-2018 02:36 AM)Massimo Gnerucci Wrote:  Yep!
The only calculator with labels below the key: that's enough to confuse me each time I grab one.

Don't forget the Topcat series, which are also pocket calculators (for sufficiently large pockets).

Topcats are really nice, indeed. But I still can't find sufficiently large pockets...

They have that nice handbag, though! :)

[TheKaneB]

Finally!!!
   

[TheKaneB]

decoding the serial number it appears to be an early 1988 model, it's in perfect shape, with very few marks and the keyboard is just a joy. For some reason I was expecting a stiffer key action, but I'm pleased to learn otherwise. The display looks in perfect conditions, and overall I'm really excited to study it in detail in the following weeks

[salvomic]

(02-01-2018 05:33 PM)TheKaneB Wrote:  ...The display looks in perfect conditions, and overall I'm really excited to study it in detail in the following weeks

happy!
enjoy it, Antonio.

;-)

[TheKaneB]

Hi Mike!

Thank you, but I'll try to resist the urge to read your code, since I wanted to implement it myself first

When I'm happy with the result, I'll compare my code with yours to learn more advanced techniques