CASIO FX-602P $WikiTagline
 

Welcome to the FX-602P homepage - where the best programmable CASIO calculator ever found it's new home. True, many calculators do have more functions but when it comes to a small form factor, light weight usability and programmability without a manual by your side then the FX-602P is king.

Of course the crown would have gone to the FX-603P - if only the FX-603P was sold outside Japan in larger numbers. In fact: I only found about the existence of the FX-603P after production was halted and it cost me a fourtune to get one from eBay.

Both, the FX-602P and the FX-603P are almost impossible to get these days and to be honest: Who carries a calculator around theses days? This is why this is also the home of the FX-602P Simulator. The FX-602P Simulator should run on most computer systems available today and most notably on mobile phones.

Read the original FX602-P documentation to see what the CASIO FX-602P could do.

Or alternatively try out the FX-602P Simulator on-line with a Java enabled browser (takes minute or so to start).

Retrospective

The FX-602P was released in 1982 and like its predecessor the FX-502P it was set to compete against the HP 41C. Both the FX-502P and the HP-41C have been released three years earlier in 1979.

Of course if one consideres the time needed to develop a new calculator the FX-502P might not originally designed to to compete against HP 41C. And it could not - the FX-502P had no alpha numeric display.

Memory wise both systems where en par: The FX-502P had 416 bytes (22 registers and 256 program steps) of memory and the HP-41C had 441 bytes (63 registers or ≈441 program steps.) of memory - that is: without memory expansion. We come to that later.

In that respect the FX-602P was more a HP-41C competitor: It did have an alphanumeric display and it featured 672 bytes (22..88 registers or ≈32..512 program steps) of memory - 1,5× the memory of a HP-41C - in basic configuration. It should also be noted that in base configuration then HP-41C did not have hyperbolic functions.

But the HP-41C hat four expansion ports. You could add 4 memory modules (or single quad module). Only one single module (64 registers or ≈448 program steps) was enough to exceed the FX-602P's memory. And one year later came the HP-41CV which had all 4 memory modules build in giving a total of 2233 bytes (319 registers or ≈2233 program steps).

But that was not all the four expansion port could do - there where extended functions module, time modules, the interface loop and much more. It was these expansion ports which made the HP-41C so attractive.

The FX-602P too hat an extension port - but one could only connect the FA-1 and FA-2 cassette interface and the FP-10 printer. Of course "only" is relative here if one considers the 8210A card reader could only store 112 (16 registers or ≈112 program steps) per side on one card and those cards where not cheap. There was a reason that HP was often translated to "high prices". The cassette interface was the better option here.

All in all the FX-602P could very well compete against the HP-41C - mostly because the FX-602P was significantly cheaper. At the time a FX-602P cost ≈€150 which was about half the price the HP-41C which cost ≈€325 and still the FX-602P had 1.5× the memory in base configuration.

Postscriptum: You might have noticed that I did not mention Texas Instruments. With most models of the TI-57x .. TI-59 series featuring only volatile memory and only the top range TI-59 featuring a card reader they where not relay serious contenders.


≈ : Program steps are an approximation as some steps need more then one byte to store.


Picture 1: FX-602P

Picture 2: FA-2 Tape Interface

Picture 3: FP-10 Printer