HP 12C Speed Test

[Gamo]

I'm wondering how much the computation speed difference between HP 12C App for Android with Samsung S7 and Physical HP 12C+ by using this simple loop program.
The CPU speed is a lot difference between these two and let see how much difference.

01 ENTER
02 ENTER
03 +
04 GTO 03

1 ENTER 1 ENTER R/S for 1 minute R/S

Add two numbers 1+1 for 1 minute and compare the grand total result.

12C on Android 15796078 per 1 second = 263268
12C+ 75637 per 1 second = 1261

Gamo

[Gamo]

One more test comparison this time using shorter loop program.

01 +
02 GTO 01

Test: 1 ENTER ENTER ENTER R/S run for 1 minute R/S

1+1+1+ .. .......... +1 for 1 minute

Approximate Result

12C+ 79029 -------> 1317 per second
12C App 12491137 ---> 208186 per second

Gamo

[pier4r]

side note: I would test something more intensive (savage benchmark maybe?) because basic operations may be quite optimized, while others are less. (common, but not so trivial. So trigonomery, exponentiation)

[Gamo]

Hello pier4r

I did try this on more sophisticate program like finding the Prime Factor still both version speed are much difference even though the 12+ is a Emulated version versus the App.

Gamo

[Dieter]

(08-22-2017 01:19 PM)Gamo Wrote:  One more test comparison this time using shorter loop program.

01 +
02 GTO 01

Test: 1 ENTER 1 ENTER 1 ENTER R/S

Simply 1 [ENTER] [ENTER] [ENTER] [R/S]. ;-)

(08-22-2017 01:19 PM)Gamo Wrote:  Approximate Result

12C+ 79029 -------> 1317 per second
12C App 12491137 ---> 208186 per second

Now compare this with a classic original hardware 12C.
What do you get? 10?

Dieter

[rprosperi]

(08-23-2017 07:29 PM)Dieter Wrote:  Now compare this with a classic original hardware 12C.
What do you get? 10?

Here are some results, using the same 2-liner, from past testing:

1985 12C: 499
1992 12C: 518
2003 12C (1x2032): 511
Early (silver, no undo) 12CP: 3150
Later (silver, w/ undo) 12CP: 1424
25th Ann 12CP: 1446
30th Ann 12C: 72,684
HP-25C: 535

Nothing surprising, though the slowdown in the 2nd-gen 12CP is interesting.

[Dieter]

(08-23-2017 08:18 PM)rprosperi Wrote:  

(08-23-2017 07:29 PM)Dieter Wrote:  Now compare this with a classic original hardware 12C.
What do you get? 10?

Here are some results, using the same 2-liner, from past testing:

1985 12C: 499
1992 12C: 518
2003 12C (1x2032): 511

I suppose this is per minute. So that's about 8...9 per second.

(08-23-2017 08:18 PM)rprosperi Wrote:  Early (silver, no undo) 12CP: 3150
Later (silver, w/ undo) 12CP: 1424
25th Ann 12CP: 1446
30th Ann 12C: 72,684

Interesting.
Especially the anniversary version.

(08-23-2017 08:18 PM)rprosperi Wrote:  HP-25C: 535

The 34C probably was not much faster. That's why I was impressed with the speed of the 41C when I eventually got one. ;-)

Dieter

[Gene]

(08-23-2017 08:18 PM)rprosperi Wrote:  Here are some results, using the same 2-liner, from past testing:

Early (silver, no undo) 12CP: 3150
Later (silver, w/ undo) 12CP: 1424

Nothing surprising, though the slowdown in the 2nd-gen 12CP is interesting.

Gene: UNDO has some overhead for the functions it applies to it seems.

[rprosperi]

(08-23-2017 09:00 PM)Dieter Wrote:  I suppose this is per minute. So that's about 8...9 per second.

Dieter

Yes, so your guess was quite good. Meant to say that when I posted, but clearly forgot.

(08-23-2017 09:02 PM)Gene Wrote:  Gene: UNDO has some overhead for the functions it applies to it seems.

My thinking too, which is why I quoted 'w/ undo' to describe. This may have been before Cyrille was involved, but we'll ask at HHC if we speak with him. It makes sense there would be some overhead, but half as fast seems like a lot of overhead....

[marszelest]

I bought an hp12C, version for the French market,
it's the fastest 12C I've seen so far
in the test "12" it is very unstable,
error 9 did not appear after the tenth attempt

[marszelest]

supplement
speed test
82300

[ctrclckws]

Anecdotally, since I haven't formally timed it.

I recently purchased a home and used the mortgage parameters in the TVM functions.

On an original 12C, calculating the payment takes a noticeable time, and using the amortization function to find the total interest after 360 payments, takes minutes.

The one cell model is similar.

The 12cp is faster but still takes time.

New build (2020) is practically instant.

The Android app is instant.

That goes along with the statements I've seen that HP intentionally kept the processor speed down on second generation models, so the performance matched the original.

In some respects, I have to agree, seeing the "running" flash has a degree of satisfaction that it is working hard.

The DM12L is in between, depending upon which speed is set.

[lvt]

(08-22-2017 08:26 AM)Gamo Wrote:  01 ENTER
02 ENTER
03 +
04 GTO 03

1 ENTER 1 ENTER R/S for 1 minute R/S

Is it normal that my 12CP takes several minutes to run the above script?

So far 5 minutes passed and it's still running...

[lvt]

I did the test again for 2 minutes and when I press R/S, the screen shows 2,858.

Is it good?

[ctrclckws]

(12-27-2022 12:20 PM)lvt Wrote:  

(08-22-2017 08:26 AM)Gamo Wrote:  01 ENTER
02 ENTER
03 +
04 GTO 03

1 ENTER 1 ENTER R/S for 1 minute R/S

Is it normal that my 12CP takes several minutes to run the above script?

So far 5 minutes passed and it's still running...

The above code has no control structure to cause it to stop looping, in other words, it will continue until the battery runs down.

A better test is the calculation of Pi program at this page.
https://www.hpmuseum.org/cgi-sys/cgiwrap...i?read=899

On 1980's Era models, it runs in about 90 minutes.
On a 2018 unit, it runs in less than a minute.

[lvt]

(12-27-2022 02:14 PM)ctrclckws Wrote:  A better test is the calculation of Pi program at this page.
https://www.hpmuseum.org/cgi-sys/cgiwrap...i?read=899

I tried the script for the original 12C on my 12CP but I got "Error 6".

Not sure whether it's the different version or I made a typo.

[ctrclckws]

There is a 12C Platinum version, it takes about 2 days to run on my relatively recent version.

I didn't try the 12C code on the Platinum.

But if you do, make sure it's in RPN mode, not ALG

[lvt]

(12-27-2022 07:42 PM)ctrclckws Wrote:  There is a 12C Platinum version, it takes about 2 days to run on my relatively recent version.

I didn't try the 12C code on the Platinum.

But if you do, make sure it's in RPN mode, not ALG

Yes it's in RPN, the input was smooth but only when I come back to the Run mode and run the code that I see the error.

Maybe I would try the 12CP code when I have another 12C, in fact I'm thinking about buying a gold 12C that is available locally for $60 so everyone in the family can use this Platinum thanks to its algebraic capability.

[Thomas Klemm]

(12-27-2022 02:14 PM)ctrclckws Wrote:  A better test is the calculation of Pi program at this page.
https://www.hpmuseum.org/cgi-sys/cgiwrap...i?read=899

Quote:based on:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
pi = 2 x sigma[i,1,1,log2(10)*N,i/(2*i+1)]
= 2 + 1/3 * (2 + 2/5 * (2 + 3/7 * (2 + 4/9 * (2 + ......

where N = number of decimal digits

From Calculating Digits of \(\pi\):

Quote:Here's the interesting relation to \(\pi\):

\(
\begin{align}
\pi = 2 + \frac{1}{3}\left(2 + \frac{2}{5}\left(2 + \frac{3}{7}\left(2 + \cdots \right)\right)\right)
\end{align}
\)

Thus we can write in this specific basis: \(\pi = 2.2222\cdots\).

Apparently a spigot algorithm was used.
Cf. A Spigot Algorithm for the Digits of Pi

[lvt]

I realized that on my 12CP I have to enter 001, 002, 003... instead of 01, 02, 03... or the code won't run.

Probably because the 12CP has 400 steps programming while the 12C only has 99 steps?