Login [Register]
Don't have an account? Register now to chat, post, use our tools, and much more.

Is it possible?
No way Dr. Frankenstein! (NO)
 71%  [ 15 ]
Plausible (MAYBE)
 28%  [ 6 ]
Total Votes : 21

LAX18 wrote:
You can change the wait states on it to make it faster. There is a great program in the archives by TheLastMillennial that allows you to change the wait states and has some great safety features.

Sounds great; could you provide a link?
https://www.cemetech.net/programs/index.php?mode=file&id=1755
Yeah, what LAX18 said. Razz

A side note, I'm currently working on a video dedicated to overclocking and adjusting the wait states of the TI 84 Plus CE. If you're interested, I have a rough draft of the video posted on my thread here.
LAX18 wrote:
You can change the wait states on it to make it faster. There is a great program in the archives by TheLastMillennial that allows you to change the wait states and has some great safety features.


Do you happen to know what itís called, or can you post a link to it?
He did provide a link, it's only 2 posts above yours. Rolling Eyes

Anyways, I suppose I can advertise my final video.
Why does Texas Instruments not simply make an advanced and more programmer friendly version of the TI 84 Plus CE? Maybe add some extra RAM, perhaps some extra Archive space while they were at it. I think the TI N Spire has about 100 MB of Flash Storage, so why does the TI 84 Plus CE have to be any diferent?
The CE VRAM is mapped to the addresses right after the regular RAM, so you couldn't easily add more memory without breaking compatibility with existing programs. Also, IIRC the OS can't address more than 4MB of flash (could be wrong about that).

Additionally, I feel the main draw of calculator programming (besides something to do in math class) are the limits on the hardware. Otherwise, you could just do the same thing on a computer.
commandcircleguy wrote:

The main draw of calculator programming (besides something to do in math class) are the limits on the hardware. Otherwise, you could just do the same thing on a computer.


I both agree and disagree with that statement. I personally like the limited amount of memory, as it acts as a challenge to programmers who program on their calculators. I enjoy trying to compress my programs to take as little space as possible, so people's archive space does not get clogged up with programs written by me. However, as much as we programmers attempt to edit our programs to make them as compact as possible, they will always take up a given amount of space. As such, they should try to fit at least the archive with as much ROM as possible, even if that means using a slightly different processor type, or a different type of flash memory.
I think the OS could theoretically map 16,777,216 bytes.
mr womp womp wrote:
I think the OS could theoretically map 16,777,216 bytes.

The z80e cpu has an address space of 16,777,216 bytes. AMD's latest x86-64 CPUs have a physical address space of 2^48 bytes (256 TB). Yet there are no motherboards that take advantage of the full 48-bit addresses, its not like anyone just happens to have 256TB of ram lying around. Similarly, TI has no reason to actually connect all 24 address bus wires to anything, or at least expose them outside the AISC, if the RAM and FLASH chips only use a <sub 24> amount.
  
Register to Join the Conversation
Have your own thoughts to add to this or any other topic? Want to ask a question, offer a suggestion, share your own programs and projects, upload a file to the file archives, get help with calculator and computer programming, or simply chat with like-minded coders and tech and calculator enthusiasts via the site-wide AJAX SAX widget? Registration for a free Cemetech account only takes a minute.

» Go to Registration page
Page 2 of 2
» All times are GMT - 5 Hours
 
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

 

Advertisement