OT: New RPN Calculator
|
|
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|
▼
12-12-2007, 07:50 PM
▼
12-12-2007, 08:45 PM
NOW! ▼
12-13-2007, 07:21 AM
I'm not sure about this strange calculator, but you can find some informations here.
Edit: The manufacturer Edited: 13 Dec 2007, 7:43 a.m.
12-13-2007, 12:41 AM
Eeeek! This thing doesn't even have a real keyboard:-/
It looks more like one of these balance devices Raymond ▼
12-13-2007, 07:03 PM
Yes, I have to agree.
12-13-2007, 07:40 PM
Looking at that beast makes one appreciate the styling of the 35s! Regards, John
12-15-2007, 08:17 AM
Yes. If it is as robust as it looks (and waterproof), it could be the ideal calculator in many labs. I bet one could make some money from importing and placing it into any lab equipment catalog. Still, several repetitive calculations are done in this area by hand, both time consuming and boring. Time to change that (of course, while I was in biophysics, I had everything in my 32SII, but never saw a workmate using a programmable :-).
12-13-2007, 09:42 AM
MK-152 is not exactly like MK-61/52 (they are pocket devices) but like MK-46/56/64. ▼
12-13-2007, 07:00 PM
Hello Serguei,
I have found your interesting article about the comparison between the old MKs and the MK-152. Is it correct, ▼
12-14-2007, 04:15 AM
Hello! Not at all, the new MK-152 is about 1300 time faster that all old models, both pocket and desktop.
You could better use the second program that take about 13 seconds at the N-Queens test. 00.Cx 01.1 02.2 03.MS0 04.Cx 05.KMS0 06.MR0 07.Fx=0 08.04 09.8 where MS - memory store, MR - memory reclaim, S/P - Start/Stop
12-14-2007, 04:26 AM
P.S. Excuse me if I didn't understand your question about speed. ▼
12-14-2007, 09:44 AM
Thanks for translating the test program. I have added it to the database and corrected the MK-152 to 13 seconds versus the MK-52 with 189 minutes. The automatic translation of your article is not clear at some points especially the differences of the test programs, but I hope the values are ok now. Do you know which CPU is used in the MK-152 and it's clock speed?
12-14-2007, 05:14 PM
Not at all. Thanks to inserting MK-152 in the benchmark test too :) AFAIK, MK-152 uses W77LE516 chip on 22 MHz I can propose you new article about MK-152 written in English especially for foreign readers that contains both technical details and cultural background. MK-152: Old Russian Motive in a New Space Age
▼
12-14-2007, 05:17 PM
Thanks for posting the English article.
Edited: 15 Dec 2007, 12:45 a.m.
12-14-2007, 09:04 PM
The core of the W77LE512 seems to be an Intel 8051 8-bit µC. Interesting to read the article.
12-15-2007, 04:44 PM
Xerxes,
As I said, current variant was a Citizen FX-4500PA manual recoding.
So following code is more faster: 8 seconds. Thanks in advance.
00.Cx 01.1 02. 2 03.MS0 04.Cx 05.KMS0 06.MR0 07.Fx=0 08.04 09.8 ▼
12-15-2007, 07:50 PM
I guess you mean Casio FX-4500PA? ;-) I have updated the MK-152 result, but are you sure with the program? It's the same as above, if I'm right. Usually the unstructured code, e.g. the FX-4500PA version, is the faster one. Have a look at the comment below the PASCAL code.
12-13-2007, 08:50 PM
I wish i could understand what the links say. All i know is, well nothing; but i believe that it is an RPN programmable (i see the russian symbol for "enter"), with connections to the outside world. Cool. Where do i sign?
12-13-2007, 04:23 PM
Here is the link to a Do not know if it works. ▼
12-13-2007, 07:10 PM
It works, but it's not easy to use it. ;-)
12-14-2007, 04:20 AM
Frank, here is a link to simulator that is easy to use and show true foreground view of calculators. So you can even press buttons on image ;)
12-14-2007, 02:14 AM
Some of the comments about the calc at the website, in only-slightly-fractured English and presumably from Russians, are entertaining to read. For example:
"It is a shame to me with my country -- KS |