Classpad 400 performance?

[towe Profile]

Hey there.

I'm currently using a Classpad 330.
Did Casio decide to finally give it some actual computing power?
It's sad - and, in exams, frustrating - to see the Classpad require around 30 seconds for a simple solve which my smartphone with the Mathlab app can do instantaneously.
Is there a reason why "real" calculators are still so incredibly slow?

[brickviking Profile]

I'm guessing part of the reason is the fact that smartphones are now using gigahertz speed dual-core and quad-core processors, usually with 2 - 64Gb storage memory and perhaps 512k - 2Gb main memory. They also have fairly high resolution screens. If I read specs right, Casio uses the SuperH 3 and SuperH 4 at up to 320x240 screen size with up to 4Mb of flash, HP seems to use Saturn-based processors or emulators running on an ARM core with varying amounts of memory. TI? Z80 for earlier models, Motorola 68000 for the TI-89 Titanium. I don't know CPUs used in other calculators. One thing I do note about all of them, they're generally all single-core with a small amount of memory and run on really low power requirements. Hence the ability to run most of the calculators for a semester—or perhaps more—on a single set of batteries. Try doing that with your smartphone.

(Post 17)

[towe Profile]

If their main concern was battery life, we wouldn't have a lit screen.
I really wouldn't mind having to charge my calculator every week or so if that meant I had some actual conputing power.

So far, the HP Prime comes closest to what I had in mind. Do you know of any other alternatives?
It's quite sad that even the CP400 only has tiny amounts of memory, and so far, I haven't found a thing regarding it's processor clock.