I figured TI would have done more to block ASM programs from launching. One result I was surprised to see was that OS 5.5+ was negligibly slower at launching ASM programs than OSes that supported ASM. Only by about 1% from OS 5.3.0, but if we see another drop in performance like OS 5.3.0 brought for the graphing tests, there could be significant speed issues for those with a pre-M TI-84 Plus CE. OS 5.0.0 continues to be the slowest at sorting but it's generally pretty darn fast at everything else.Īs you get to the newer OSes which added removed features, it's clear that the calculator is getting slower and slower at doing every function. OK, we see a lot of similarities to last years results. arTIfiCE and AsmHOOK were only installed on OS versions that required them all jail breaking utilities were stored in the Archive. Each test was completed 5 times, then the times were averaged into the table above. The calculator was plugged in and fully charged the entire time. RAYTRSPR ( this is a 3D modeling test using raycasting)Įach test was performed from the RAM, on the same calculator, in the same order, and after a full mem clear.

Here are the tests I performed, you can get prgmTIMER here.ĪBENCH (runs every benchmark and stores the results into a list) TI also changed something for the worse between OS 5.2.1 and OS 5.3.0 because every OS newer than 5.2.1 is typically 3 seconds slower. TI changed something for the better between OS 5.0.0 and OS 5.1.0 that made list sorting almost 9x faster on newer OSes! Even for numbers that weren't 0s. However, if you look at each function separately, it's clear they are generally getting slower on newer OSes. Then OS 5.3.0 (relatively) crushed the times for the summation and list tests but fell behind a bit in BASIC performance.Īs you can see by the graph, the only reason the newer OSes had good total scores was because the raytracing program was such a huge factor in this test. OS 5.0.0 is the champ for random numbers, graphing horizontal and vertical lines, and overall BASIC performance. I'd like to dig into the numbers a bit more though. However, if you just care about the speed of specific functions, then you can't go wrong with OS 5.1.x or 5.2.1. Overall it seems if you want the best BASIC performance, then OS 5.0.0 or OS 5.3.1 is the way to go. I only ran prgmRAYTRSPR once because it takes over 30 minutes per run and ain't nobody got time to do that 5 times over! I have yet to retest OSes under 5.3.0 for new prgmRAYTRSPR times. Each test, with the exception of prgmRAYTRSPR was completed 5 times then the times were averaged into the table above. Each test was performed from the RAM, on the same calculator (revision pre-A), in the same order, and after a full mem clear.

Ti 84 plus ce programs