 | | another comparison
|
|
We have compared the sampling and computing speed of NXT and RCX. NXT uses standard firmware 1.03 and is programmed with the LabVIEW toolkit. RCX is programmed with ULTIMATE ROBOLAB. Both bricks do the same thing: computing the DFT on a small (...) (18 years ago, 20-Jan-07, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: another comparison
|
|
(...) I'd love to make some other comparisions; actually, some of us have been trying to figure out a good way to do this. Part of the problem is defineing specific "goals" for a battery of tests. A DFT (while impressive), is propably not the best (...) (18 years ago, 21-Jan-07, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: another comparison
|
|
(...) Perhaps a good benchmark would be to write a PID controller and measure the number of control loop iterations per second that can be achieved under each environment. This incorporates sensor input with motor output, and uses a moderate amount (...) (18 years ago, 21-Jan-07, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | RE: another comparison
|
|
Chris Phillips wrote on Sunday, January 21, 2007 7:38 AM "My gut tells me that the RCX (using BrickOS) would give the NXT (using anything available so far) a good run for its money, though..." Once you reach a certain base performance level, then (...) (18 years ago, 21-Jan-07, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: another comparison
|
|
(...) 1. The DFT certainly may be considered as overkill for a toy robot kit. But I am not sure that this forum considers the RCX or NXT only as toys. To say that NXT or RCX are not made for this or that is like saying to the inventor of the pencil (...) (18 years ago, 21-Jan-07, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: another comparison
|
|
Hi Claude, (...) do you have the DFT algorithm in some programming language like Java or C? I'm just guessing, but maybe it could also be useful for speech recognition? Or maybe telling the cat from the dog? (The sound sensor should be usable as a (...) (18 years ago, 24-Jan-07, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: another comparison
|
|
(...) Hi Jürgen, The document, where I develop the theory of the algorithm has some text-pseudo code ( a mixture of C and PASCAL) that you easily can convert to anything. Since the document is math stuff, I largely prefer the := notation for (...) (18 years ago, 25-Jan-07, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: another comparison
|
|
Hi Claude, (...) thanks, I found it at (URL) . And pseudocode is fine with me, Java or C were just meant as examples for textual languages. (...) :-) Best is to avoid assignment and modifiable state whenever possible. Jürgen (18 years ago, 25-Jan-07, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: another comparison
|
|
(...) 1. Indeed. 2. I got an email some time ago from a 16 year old student Korean student, Jimin Sung,living in the US, who is making an autonomous underwater robot. I was so amazed of what he was doing. He sent me his application of the RFT (...) (18 years ago, 25-Jan-07, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: another comparison
|
|
../snip (...) Ah, I forgot, he is trying to do this with an ARM. (18 years ago, 25-Jan-07, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: another comparison
|
|
(...) Now the new LabVIEW NXT tookit 2.0 that includes firmware 1.26 drastically beets the RCX performance ( (URL) ). We repeated the experiment and now the NXT runs the DFT much faster than the RCX with more features: power-spectrum (needs floating (...) (15 years ago, 20-Aug-09, to lugnet.robotics)
|
