Summation based benchmark for calculators
04-22-2021, 06:33 PM (This post was last modified: 04-30-2021 09:41 PM by Guenter Schink.)
Post: #221
 Guenter Schink Senior Member Posts: 529 Joined: Dec 2013
RE: Summation based benchmark for calculators
I think we have new champion -- by quite a margin

Prime G2 Beta 2.1.14549 using Python
Code:
#PYTHON name from math import * import sys import hpprime t=hpprime.eval("time") c=int(sys.argv[0]) print() print("Exponent = ",c) print("Iterations = ", 10**c) a=0 for i in range(1, 10**c+1):     a=a+pow((e**(sin(atan(i)))),1/3)  print("Time (sec) = ",round(hpprime.eval("time")-t,4)) print("Sum = ",a) #end Export sums(c) Begin   PYTHON(name, c); End;

From the Home screen invoke this Python program with sums(?)

where "?" question mark has to be replaced by the exponent which denotes the magnitude
• 3 for 1000
• 4 for 10 000
• 5 for 100 000
• 6 for 1 000 000

Output will be the exponent, the resulting number, the time and the sum. E.g.
3
1000
0.036 sec
1395.3462877433426

Code:
Results: 3       1 000  0.036 sec     1395.3462877433426 4      10 000  0.159 sec    13955.857904429155 5     100 000  1.425 sec   139560.9761410521 6   1 000 000 14.046 sec  1395612.158725383

I think that's quite impressive specifically when compared with the values for native PPL.

Günter

Edit: put the timing into the Python code rather than using TEVAL
05-01-2021, 09:18 AM (This post was last modified: 05-01-2021 09:23 AM by OlidaBel.)
Post: #222
 OlidaBel Member Posts: 74 Joined: Mar 2021
RE: Summation based benchmark for calculators
Something new to me, maybe a lack of Prime knowledge.
My Prime is configured in RPN (for stack Home computations).

I tried the sum "benchmark" proposed here, then Pick (copy) the first formula to modify it in the command line, I want to run a bigger one, from a 1000 to 10000 sum.
I only added a zero behind "1000", the Editor refuses to validate the formula. Why ?

https://ibb.co/wgZJbrL
https://ibb.co/VD2Wzp6
https://ibb.co/WfpDSGv

---
HP 48GX, Prime G2, 50G, 28S, 15c CE. SwissMicros DM42, DM15L
A long time ago : 11C, 15C, 28C.
08-05-2021, 04:06 PM (This post was last modified: 08-05-2021 04:09 PM by pier4r.)
Post: #223
 pier4r Senior Member Posts: 2,248 Joined: Nov 2014
RE: Summation based benchmark for calculators
Finally updated up to post #221 (yay after years! Well priorities...)

It took more than 2 hours, so it wasn't that trivial.

Updated also here: http://www.wiki4hp.com/doku.php?id=bench...g_exp_root
and here: https://osdn.net/users/pier4r/pf/various...chmark.txt

I am not so sure about some results regarding 500k with the prime G2. Now you all need to add more entries so that I have to catch up again

Wikis are great, Contribute :)
08-08-2021, 10:59 AM (This post was last modified: 08-08-2021 11:02 AM by Guenter Schink.)
Post: #224
 Guenter Schink Senior Member Posts: 529 Joined: Dec 2013
RE: Summation based benchmark for calculators
(08-05-2021 04:06 PM)pier4r Wrote:  Finally updated up to post #221 (yay after years! Well priorities...)

It took more than 2 hours, so it wasn't that trivial.

Updated also here: http://www.wiki4hp.com/doku.php?id=bench...g_exp_root
and here: https://osdn.net/users/pier4r/pf/various...chmark.txt

I am not so sure about some results regarding 500k with the prime G2. Now you all need to add more entries so that I have to catch up again

The HP Expander (not XP Expander) is a calculator from HP, not a mobile device. It never saw the light of the markets. I've got a prototype at one of the HHCCs.

Günter
08-08-2021, 11:03 AM (This post was last modified: 08-08-2021 11:04 AM by Massimo Gnerucci.)
Post: #225
 Massimo Gnerucci Senior Member Posts: 2,664 Joined: Dec 2013
RE: Summation based benchmark for calculators
(08-08-2021 10:59 AM)Guenter Schink Wrote:  The HP Expander (not XP Expander) is a calculator from HP, not a mobile device. But I think it never saw the light of the markets. I've got a prototype at one of the HHCCs.

It actually was "HP Xpander".
Have a couple, from different development stages.

Greetings,
Massimo

-+×÷ ↔ left is right and right is wrong
08-08-2021, 11:44 AM
Post: #226
 Guenter Schink Senior Member Posts: 529 Joined: Dec 2013
RE: Summation based benchmark for calculators
(08-08-2021 11:03 AM)Massimo Gnerucci Wrote:
(08-08-2021 10:59 AM)Guenter Schink Wrote:  The HP Expander (not XP Expander) is a calculator from HP, not a mobile device. But I think it never saw the light of the markets. I've got a prototype at one of the HHCCs.

It actually was "HP Xpander".
Have a couple, from different development stages.

Thanks for the correction. I could have had a closer look either to the device or the Wiki article

Günter
08-12-2021, 08:00 AM
Post: #227
 Felix Stehli Junior Member Posts: 9 Joined: Apr 2021
RE: Summation based benchmark for calculators
ThetaCalc, an RPN calculator app running on iOS which can be programmed in JavaScript, produced the following result for n = 1000000 on an iPhone 12:

HP museum benchmark (n = 1000000)
Sum = 1395612.1587253837
Time = 0.189 seconds

I don't know, however, whether the app fits into one of the given categories.

Here is the program:

Code:
function benchmark(n) {   let s = 0;   for (let i = 1; i <= n; i++) {     s += Math.pow(       Math.exp(         Math.sin(           Math.atan(i))), 1/3);   }   return s; } const n = 1000000; startTimer(); let s = benchmark(n); stopTimer(); println(HP museum benchmark (n = ${n})); println(Sum =${s}); printlnElapsed();
08-17-2021, 11:04 PM
Post: #228
 Marc van Lemmen Junior Member Posts: 44 Joined: May 2014
RE: Summation based benchmark for calculators
I recently received a Sharp PC-1201 and was currious how this nice little machine would perform, here are the results :

N=10 ~25s result 13,318529402
N=100 ~285s result 138,90159786
N=1000 ~2844s result 1394,95067416
08-17-2021, 11:23 PM (This post was last modified: 08-17-2021 11:23 PM by toml_12953.)
Post: #229
 toml_12953 Senior Member Posts: 2,103 Joined: Dec 2013
RE: Summation based benchmark for calculators
(04-22-2021 06:33 PM)Guenter Schink Wrote:  I think we have new champion -- by quite a margin

Prime G2 Beta 2.1.14549 using Python

When I copy and paste that code into the emulator, I get

Code:
Traceback (most recent call last):  File "<stdin>", line 5, in <module> ValueError: invalid syntax for integer with base 10: '10\xef\xb9\x90000' Traceback (most recent call last):   File "<stdin>", line 5, in <module> ValueError: invalid syntax for integer with base  10: '1\xef\xb9\x90000' Traceback (most recent call last):   File "<stdin>", line 5, in <module> ValueError: invalid syntax for integer with base  10: '1\xef\xb9\x90000' Traceback (most recent call last):   File "<stdin>", line 5, in <module> ValueError: invalid syntax for integer with base  10: '1\xef\xb9\x90000'

Tom L
Cui bono?
08-18-2021, 03:09 PM
Post: #230
 Guenter Schink Senior Member Posts: 529 Joined: Dec 2013
RE: Summation based benchmark for calculators
(08-17-2021 11:23 PM)toml_12953 Wrote:
(04-22-2021 06:33 PM)Guenter Schink Wrote:  I think we have new champion -- by quite a margin

Prime G2 Beta 2.1.14549 using Python

When I copy and paste that code into the emulator, I get

Code:
Traceback (most recent call last):  File "<stdin>", line 5, in <module> ValueError: invalid syntax for integer with base 10: '10\xef\xb9\x90000' Traceback (most recent call last):   File "<stdin>", line 5, in <module> ValueError: invalid syntax for integer with base  10: '1\xef\xb9\x90000' Traceback (most recent call last):   File "<stdin>", line 5, in <module> ValueError: invalid syntax for integer with base  10: '1\xef\xb9\x90000' Traceback (most recent call last):   File "<stdin>", line 5, in <module> ValueError: invalid syntax for integer with base  10: '1\xef\xb9\x90000'

I just also copied it to the virtual Prime. works flawlessly. (?)

The error actually points to line 6 "c=int(sys.argv[0])" Can't assume what's going wrong.

Günter
08-18-2021, 04:01 PM
Post: #231
 toml_12953 Senior Member Posts: 2,103 Joined: Dec 2013
RE: Summation based benchmark for calculators
(08-18-2021 03:09 PM)Guenter Schink Wrote:
(08-17-2021 11:23 PM)toml_12953 Wrote:  When I copy and paste that code into the emulator, I get

Code:
Traceback (most recent call last):  File "<stdin>", line 5, in <module> ValueError: invalid syntax for integer with base 10: '10\xef\xb9\x90000' Traceback (most recent call last):   File "<stdin>", line 5, in <module> ValueError: invalid syntax for integer with base  10: '1\xef\xb9\x90000' Traceback (most recent call last):   File "<stdin>", line 5, in <module> ValueError: invalid syntax for integer with base  10: '1\xef\xb9\x90000' Traceback (most recent call last):   File "<stdin>", line 5, in <module> ValueError: invalid syntax for integer with base  10: '1\xef\xb9\x90000'

I just also copied it to the virtual Prime. works flawlessly. (?)

The error actually points to line 6 "c=int(sys.argv[0])" Can't assume what's going wrong.

Günter

I had digit grouping set to 123,456.789. When I change it to 123456.789, I don't get an error but I get a lot of zeroes on the screen and what may be an infinite loop.

Tom L
Cui bono?
08-18-2021, 06:56 PM (This post was last modified: 08-18-2021 07:15 PM by Guenter Schink.)
Post: #232
 Guenter Schink Senior Member Posts: 529 Joined: Dec 2013
RE: Summation based benchmark for calculators
(08-18-2021 04:01 PM)toml_12953 Wrote:  I had digit grouping set to 123,456.789. When I change it to 123456.789, I don't get an error but I get a lot of zeroes on the screen and what may be an infinite loop.

o.K. I think I found the problem. It wasn't clearly explained. You have to enter the exponent rather then the number. E.g. enter 3 to get 1000 iterations. Have a look at the code and now it should become obvious.

I chose this because "sys.argv[0]" doesn't seem to work reliably with numbers greater 999. Consequently if it works somehow, the first output is a digit with as many zeros as requested, and that output takes a while.

Günter

edit: I just realized that I can't run the program from the command line I had to go to the program catalog <SHIFT> <1> and run it fro there
08-18-2021, 07:18 PM
Post: #233
 toml_12953 Senior Member Posts: 2,103 Joined: Dec 2013
RE: Summation based benchmark for calculators
(08-18-2021 06:56 PM)Guenter Schink Wrote:
(08-18-2021 04:01 PM)toml_12953 Wrote:  I had digit grouping set to 123,456.789. When I change it to 123456.789, I don't get an error but I get a lot of zeroes on the screen and what may be an infinite loop.

o.K. I think I found the problem. It wasn't clearly explained. You have to enter the exponent rather then the number. E.g. enter 3 to get 1000 iterations. Have a look at the code and now it should become obvious.

I chose this because "sys.argv[0]" doesn't seem to work reliably with numbers greater 999. Consequently if it works somehow, the first output is a digit with as many zeros as requested, and that output takes a while.

Günter

edit: I just realized that I can't run the program from the command line I had to go to the program catalog <SHIFT> <1> and run it fro there

Oof! Es tuit mir leid! Yes, an exponent of 1000 would take a long time! Thank you for replying.

Tom L
Cui bono?
11-27-2022, 10:34 AM
Post: #234
 pier4r Senior Member Posts: 2,248 Joined: Nov 2014
RE: Summation based benchmark for calculators
Updated up to post #233
Also the HP Xpander name and category fixed. Hopefully I didn't miss anything.

Wikis are great, Contribute :)
01-24-2023, 01:12 PM
Post: #235
 BINUBALL Member Posts: 133 Joined: Mar 2021
RE: Summation based benchmark for calculators
I have bought newer casio model, fx-570CW several months ago and reminded this thread. Test results below:

max = 10000
~ 581s - casio fx-570CW, 13955.8579 (sum function)
max = 1000
~ 59s - casio fx-570CW, 1395.346288 (sum function)
max = 100
~ 7s - casio fx-570CW, 139.297187 (sum function)
max = 10
~ 1s - casio fx-570CW, 13.71183502 (sum function)

fx-570CW is significantly faster than fx-570EX. Let's compare them.

1s / 2s (max = 10)
7s / 12s (max = 100)
59s / 109s (max = 1000)
581s / 1073s (max = 10000)

S.Korean / HP-50G | fx-570EX | fx-570CW | HP-200LX
01-28-2023, 09:22 AM
Post: #236
 BINUBALL Member Posts: 133 Joined: Mar 2021
RE: Summation based benchmark for calculators
Tested with HP-200LX too.

max = 10000
~ 257s - HP-200LX turbo c 2.01, 13955.857904
max = 1000
~ 27s - HP-200LX turbo c 2.01, 1395.346288
max = 100
~ 4s - HP-200LX turbo c 2.01, 139.297187
max = 10
~ 2s - HP-200LX turbo c 2.01, 13.711835

Code:
#include <math.h> main() { double i,sum; i=1; sum=0; for(i=1;i<=10000;i++) { sum+=pow(exp(sin(atan(i))),1/3.); } printf("%lf\n",sum); }

S.Korean / HP-50G | fx-570EX | fx-570CW | HP-200LX
04-05-2023, 12:53 PM (This post was last modified: 04-05-2023 01:13 PM by Eddie W. Shore.)
Post: #237
 Eddie W. Shore Senior Member Posts: 1,584 Joined: Dec 2013
RE: Summation based benchmark for calculators
Σ( ³√[e^(sin(tan^-1(x)))], x=1 to 1000)

Casio fx-991CW:
Result: 1395.346288
Time: approx. 57 seconds

TI-30X Pro MathPrint (Europe):
Result: 1395.346288
Time: approx. 1 minute, 44 seconds
04-05-2023, 08:01 PM
Post: #238
 Guenter Schink Senior Member Posts: 529 Joined: Dec 2013
RE: Summation based benchmark for calculators
Once again Python on PRIME

This time using "Generator"
Code:
from math import * from hpprime import * Number=input("Enter number:") Number=int(Number) print(" {:,d}".format(Number)) t=eval('time') Sum = sum(pow(e**(sin(atan(i))),1/3) for i in range(1,Number+1))  t=eval('time')-t print("Sum = {:}".format(Sum),"\nTime = {:}".format(round(t,8)))

significantly faster than the previous published Python code (Top of this page). The calculation is done in this one-liner:
>>Sum = sum(pow(e**(sin(atan(i))),1/3) for i in range(1,Number+1)) <<

Code:
10,000      ->   0.101 sec     13955.8579042916 100,000     ->   1.038 sec    139560.9761411052 1,000,000   ->  10.381 sec   1395612.15872538 10,000,000  -> 103.724 sec  13956123.9815476

Günter
04-10-2023, 02:13 PM
Post: #239
 gehakte_bits Junior Member Posts: 37 Joined: Dec 2021
RE: Summation based benchmark for calculators
HP Prime G2 V.14603 Python
==========================
100.000 -> 0.84s
1.000.000 -> 8.4s
10.000.000 -> 84.1s

optimized post #238:

x=1/3
Sum = sum(exp(sin(atan(i)))**x for i in range(1,Number+1))
04-10-2023, 10:21 PM
Post: #240
 Mike T. Member Posts: 130 Joined: Dec 2013
RE: Summation based benchmark for calculators
(01-28-2023 09:22 AM)BINUBALL Wrote:  Tested with HP-200LX too.

Couldn't resist trying this on a modern PC...

Code:
 #include <math.h> #include <stdio.h> void main() {   double i,sum;   i=1;   sum=0;   for(i=1;i<=10000;i++)   {   sum+=pow(exp(sin(atan(i))),1/3.);   }   printf("%lf\n",sum); } $gcc sum.c -o sum -lm$ time ./sum  13955.857904 real    0m0.005s user    0m0.005s sys    0m0.001s \$

Mike T.

HP21, HP25, HP32E, HP33C, HP34C, HP10C, HP11C, HP12C, HP32S, HP22S
 « Next Oldest | Next Newest »

User(s) browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)