Re: A86: Theory question [i think its about time we....]
[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: A86: Theory question [i think its about time we....]
I use rechargebles, but the voltage is always lower. I use those cause they
charge 1000 times, whereas I burned a set of renewals in a semester.
terrence
Eugene Dirks wrote:
> ok i just have to jump in on this one... i haven't found a method to
> actually clock my calc's mHz, but through the method i chose (just removing
> the capacitor) i've heard and read in many places that it is about 3.5x
> faster. 21mhz more or less. I have actually heard of someone saying they
> were able to determine that it does in fact run that fast.
>
> the point...
> use rayovac renewal batteries in your calc. at the speed mine is running i
> still only recharge the batteries every month or so, even then they don't
> really need it, it just seems to be slightly faster when recharged.
>
> there is not as you suggested a minimal speed increase. it is a huge speed
> in crease. you especially notice this when graphing complicated functions
> and also on long integrals.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Cassady Roop <croop@oregontrail.net>
> To: <assembly-86@lists.ticalc.org>
> Sent: Wednesday, May 12, 1999 8:46 AM
> Subject: Re: A86: Theory question [i think its about time we....]
>
> >
> > And how long would the batteries last at 12 MHz? I'm no processor
> > expert, but it seems to me that faster things always take much more
> > power. For a minimally noticeable speed increase (at least in TI-OS)
> > you might drop your battery life 50% or more...
> >
> > > I was thinking... you can get a 20 MHz Z80 for $12...
> > > I f you removed the chip currently in there, and
> > > replaced it with one of those, the calc should run a
> > > lot faster (the bus and memory access would slow it
> > > down, but it should still be a fair amount faster...
> >
> >
Follow-Ups:
References: