Post Reply 
hp65 vs 41c vs 35s µbenchmark
06-01-2014, 08:41 PM
Post: #29
RE: hp65 vs 41c vs 35s µbenchmark
(06-01-2014 03:26 PM)Marcel Samek Wrote:  On my 67 I only get 103 after 30s. That's hard to believe that the 67 is that much slower.

If your 67 program uses a simple GTO command this seems realistic. I do not own a 67, but a 34C with similar speed. Compared to a 41C the latter is at least 3x slower. With a simple program consisting essentially of one addition and a GTO, the 41C advantage even grows since jump targets are "compiled" while the 67 has to do a new label search in every single loop. And since it searches from the current line onwards, it has to check roughly 220 lines ahead... #-)

So 103 loops on a '67 looks realistic, compared to 500+ on a 41C with this kind of program (!). The already mentioned older thread reported 226 loops per minute, i.e. 113 in 30 seconds on another '67 which essentially matches your result. You may get a better result with a GTO(i) command with a negative number in register I. The older thread reports about 50% more speed for this option. So you could try something like this:

Code:
001 LBL A
002 CHS
003 STO I
004 Clx
005 +
006 GTO(i)

1 [ENTER] [ENTER] [ENTER]  [A]

But do not forget that this is a very (!) simple test that does not provide much information regarding real world HP67-programs. IMHO you can expect about 1/3 the speed of a HP41, on average.

Dieter
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 


Messages In This Thread
RE: hp65 vs 41c vs 35s µbenchmark - Dieter - 06-01-2014 08:41 PM
RE: hp65 vs 41c vs 35s µbenchmark - pito - 06-05-2014, 05:49 PM



User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)