HP Forum Archive 20

[ Return to Index | Top of Index ]

41CL Version of HP15C+ muscle-flexing exercise Message #1 Posted by 聲gel Martin on 27 Sept 2011, 4:16 a.m. It occurred to me that all this (justified) attention and praise to the 15C_LE is having some side effects - namely the other fantastic news - like the 41CL - are not being covered in just measure. So here's one sweet and short note for your enjoyment. Reference to Gene's article on the 15C+ "crazy" program to demonstrate both the 15C capabilities and the LE superior execution speed (no PSE lines in there :) http://www.hpmuseum.org/cgi-sys/cgiwrap/hpmuseum/archv020.cgi?read=195013#195013 I keyed in the following program on my CL, conveniently equipped with the SandMath and the Advantage (they're all included in the CL module library). For comparison purposes, the code mimics Gene's for the 15C+, including the shortcomings listed at the end of his pdf. Execution time is about 2.60 sec, or about 3x faster than the 15C+ (yes, I'm biased). The result is (no surprisingly) identical. Use function VMANT to see the full mantissa. I wonder how does the "production" LE compare to the pre-production 15C+. Probably just the same? My ordered LE is entangled in the customs cobwebs - anybody cares to complete the chart? 01 LBL "15C+" 02 RAD 03 "A" 04 3.003 05 MATDIM 06 0 07 MSIJA 08 2 09 MSR+ 10 -3 11 MSR+ 12 5 13 MSR+ 14 7 15 MSR+ 16 -1 17 MSR+ 18 0 19 MSR+ 20 1 21 MSR+ 22 -2 23 MSR+ 24 4 25 MSR+ 26 MDET 27 10 28 / 29 STO 00 30 LASTX 31 ENTER^ 32 3 33 NPR - From the SandMath Module 34 1 35 E^X 36 10^X 37 / 38 PI 39 R-P 40 RCL 00 41 "SX/X" 42 SCI 6 43 INTEG 44 END

Re: 41CL Version of HP15C+ muscle-flexing exercise Message #2 Posted by Paul Dale on 27 Sept 2011, 4:37 a.m., in response to message #1 by 聲gel Martin My 15C LE is taking about 1.5 seconds to run Gene's program. - Pauli

Re: 41CL Version of HP15C+ muscle-flexing exercise Message #3 Posted by gene wright on 27 Sept 2011, 7:51 a.m., in response to message #2 by Paul Dale I believe it was a display blinking problem that was seen on the 15c+ while running the crazy test program that pointed out an issue with the display update routines. That's the base cause of the 15c+ run times being slower than the production 15c LE times (again, I believe). However, the fix that sped up the run times appears to have contributed to the pause problems. But, Angel...how long does a 15c equivalent of this HP 41 program take? LBL A "HI" END :-)

Re: 41CL Version of HP15C+ muscle-flexing exercise Message #4 Posted by From Hong Kong on 27 Sept 2011, 8:21 a.m., in response to message #3 by gene wright Gene, do you know whether a firmware fix to address the PSE problems and other issues will be released soon? Edited: 27 Sept 2011, 8:21 a.m.

Re: 41CL Version of HP15C+ muscle-flexing exercise Message #5 Posted by gene wright on 27 Sept 2011, 11:36 a.m., in response to message #4 by From Hong Kong No word yet. I'm sure we will hear something soon.

Re: 41CL Version of HP15C+ muscle-flexing exercise Message #6 Posted by 聲gel Martin on 27 Sept 2011, 9:05 a.m., in response to message #3 by gene wright Quote: But, Angel...how long does a 15c equivalent of this HP 41 program take? Well, it'll take forever - I am no 15C expert but I struggle to know how you type "HI" in it? On the other hand, it's easy enough to find out how long it takes on the CL if you use the Time_Module to do the time keeping :-) But can you time it on the 15C_LE ???

Re: 41CL Version of HP15C+ muscle-flexing exercise Message #7 Posted by BruceH on 28 Sept 2011, 1:58 p.m., in response to message #3 by gene wright Quote: But, Angel...how long does a 15c equivalent of this HP 41 program take? LBL A "HI" END :-) Gene, This is really quite easy. LBL A 14 RTN The run time is pretty much instantaneous but it was a bit tricky trying to measure it while standing on my head. ;-)

Re: 41CL Version of HP15C+ muscle-flexing exercise Message #8 Posted by gene wright on 28 Sept 2011, 2:37 p.m., in response to message #7 by BruceH Ok, how about: LBL A "SMACK BRUCE" RTN ? :-)

How good is the 41CL? Message #9 Posted by snaggs on 27 Sept 2011, 7:40 a.m., in response to message #1 by 聲gel Martin Compared to a 42s, how does a 41CL stand-up? Are the keys on the 41 superior? With all the modules included the feature set should be good?What about speed? Daniel.

Re: How good is the 41CL? Message #10 Posted by 聲gel Martin on 27 Sept 2011, 9:13 a.m., in response to message #9 by snaggs Quote: Compared to a 42s, how does a 41CL stand-up? Are the keys on the 41 superior? As always, it's a matter of personal taste. To me the keys are definitely superior, and no soft-Alpha thank God. Quote: With all the modules included the feature set should be good? It's as close to perfect as you can imagine. Quote: What about speed? As fast as I need it to be, a joy. See benchmarking article at: http://www.hpmuseum.org/cgi-sys/cgiwrap/hpmuseum/articles.cgi?read=1002 (BTW it'll be good to have all that data in a chart format, right Gene??? :-) In my experience the real-life calculations are a better measure, but FWIW here are the results: The NEWT 41CL logic board upgrade for the HP 41. Code: LBL 00 + GTO 00 1X mode: 1,055 2X Turbo mode: 1,913 5X Turbo mode: 4,153 10X Turbo mode: 6,538 20X Turbo mode: 9,179 50X Turbo mode: 12,022 HP-42s FAST MODE S/N 2849A with goose disabled Count: 6,485 HP-42S with "goose" disabled. Non-fast mode. Count: 3,067 HP-42S Count: 2,115 Code: LBL 00 + GTO 00 Edited: added 42S data Edited: 27 Sept 2011, 9:18 a.m.

Re: How good is the 41CL? Message #11 Posted by 聲gel Martin on 27 Sept 2011, 9:27 a.m., in response to message #10 by 聲gel Martin alright, so after I looked at the 42S different "configurations" data points I went ahead and performed the test on a goose-disabled 41CL - comparing apples to apples, as it should be. Code: CLA AVIEW 1 LBL_00 + GTO_00 The TURBO-50 figure increases to 27,417 - more than double! Time for an updated chart!

Re: How good is the 41CL? Message #12 Posted by Juergen Keller on 27 Sept 2011, 9:47 a.m., in response to message #10 by 聲gel Martin I did another 41CL benchmark, and this article (sorry, in German). 1.5 or 2.6 sec makes not much difference to me, both is muuuch faster than the original calcs :-)

Re: How good is the 41CL? Message #13 Posted by 聲gel Martin on 27 Sept 2011, 10:07 a.m., in response to message #12 by Juergen Keller wow!, fantastic article - amazingly exhaustive and authoritative! Definitely the definitive reference - and I agree, we're in the realms of hair-splitting and fringe-wandering.

You can write NUT assembler on the 41CL? Message #14 Posted by snaggs on 27 Sept 2011, 6:41 p.m., in response to message #12 by Juergen Keller Surely thats a big advantage if you have something complicated to implement. Daniel.

Re: You can write NUT assembler on the 41CL? Message #15 Posted by 聲gel Martin on 28 Sept 2011, 2:23 a.m., in response to message #14 by snaggs Yes you can - just use any of the available editors from all the modules included in its library (HEPAX, DAVID-ASM, ZENROM...) and the Quasi-RAM blocks also available there.

How does 41CL battery life compare to 12C and 15LE's? Message #16 Posted by snaggs on 28 Sept 2011, 11:49 p.m., in response to message #12 by Juergen Keller It states its standby (off) draw as 110 vs 10 of the original. So, its ten times worse, but then with a modern set of lithium AA's, that would probably compensate. How does it compare to emulating on an ARM chip? Is the battery usage a side effect of FPGA? Daniel.

Re: How does 41CL battery life compare to 12C and 15LE's? Message #17 Posted by Monte Dalrymple on 29 Sept 2011, 10:03 a.m., in response to message #16 by snaggs The FPGA is powered down during sleep. But the CPLD, which contains the logic that must always remain active, draws over half of that sleep current. The RAM only requires about 2uA. The RS232 driver and 6V level shifter are about 5uA each, and the various power supplies and reference divider take the rest.

Re: How good is the 41CL? Message #18 Posted by Howard Owen on 27 Sept 2011, 12:53 p.m., in response to message #9 by snaggs The keys on the 41C set my personal standard for keyboard quality. They may or may not be the absolute best HP ever produced, but they are the ones my fingers got to know in my early days as a programmer. The 42S keys are quite good, but they just don't match my personal prejudice for "best."

[ Return to Index | Top of Index ]

Go back to the main exhibit hall