A Rant! - The new "improved" Casio fx-83GT CW Calculator

An issue for anyone doing any calculations involving standard form /scientific notation on the new Casio fx-83GT CW calculator.
This affects anyone doing N5, Higher and AH Physics.

[@westmancoat]

I cannot agree more. As an engineering lecturer of 15 years, Casio have messed up here. By reducing buttons (and cost) they have made it a more complex tool to operate. I could be accused of not moving with change, but this is a cost saver, not an advance for students.

[@mrstewartphysics]

The only reason for having a dedicated x10^x button is to logically and exclusively connect a mantissa to a ‘power of ten’. That automatic functionality has now gone. A step backwards in my view but the ‘bodmas’ brigade seems quite happy.

[@sollybunn]

there are enough buttons to make a fully functioning calculator which is atleast on par with the old one. instead of putting all the features in shift and alpha or in drop down menus, ... they just don't. What's even worse they have a bunch of drop down menus, which aren't navigatable by number and contain literally nothing. They also removed all the useful modes and replaced it with mathbox... a random number generator and a number line.

[@stustjohn]

I cannot fathom why on earth Casio have done this. It’s ridiculous! Now, if my old fx-83GT plus breaks, I am faced with using this substandard Classwiz thing, or buying a cheap Chinese ‘knock-off’ Casio fx-83 clone. (I’m not a fan of doing that as I worry they are produced using slave labour, etc., or might be badly made, but… )

Totally agree with this!!! Plus what is wrong with an = sign? Why does now confuse the students with EXE instead!

[@a.k.3659]

LOL, how come students get confused with execute instead of = in the same place?

[@saujanyapoudel8910]

I guess Casio is targeting high schoolers who would later use graphing calculator in college. They made it menu driven and the buttons similar to a graphing calculator so the students would choose Casio over TIs graphing calculator since they would be used to Casio's interface

[@hellykitty7139]

I've googled this exact thing, where is my bloody equals button!

[@saujanyapoudel8910]

@@a.k.3659 I have seen people hitting the 'Ans' key trying to get the 'Answer'. I doubt they would do any better with this one.

[@missdixyd]

Just tried this on my daughter’s as she has just got one for school. It follows bodmas if you input it that way, can add brackets but more long winded. But thanks for the heads up about using the fraction button first!

[@blaser80]

That's quite a change because Casio only used to implement PEDMAS rules for North American calculators, they historically haven't done this for the UK market because we only use BODMAS as a teaching aid for younger children as we move to more advanced maths as we do not follow BODMAS rules to the letter, certainly not for A-levels and University level maths.

[@edn8539]

nice vid sir. I think it goes by how it is written in fact if you write 686:(8x10^-4) it outputs correctly

[@corruptedfuel]

you know its bad when the counterfeit casio calculators work better than the real thing

[@davidharris5441]

As an engineer this would mean me binning the calculator, as a maths teacher it has now got me seriously considering moving over to TI. The difficulties my students are having with this new 'simplified' interface and menu system are relentless without adding in incorrect application of the order of operations.

[@GeeklyUpdate]

I perform simple calculations for work. Replaced my old (lost) Casio with this one and there's no sodding % button without going via 'Catalogue - Probability - %'. It's easy enough to use the decimal but I was very, very annoyed to discover there's no % button any more!

[@cartofulfierbinte]

I've just bought a fx-83GT CW now and it works right for me.

[@Silanda]

I tested a few Casio calculators that I've got. My fx-991cw does this too, while the fx-991ex and the fx-CG50 do not. The venerable old fx-82d that I used for my GCSEs doesn't, of course, but it doesn't use VPAM. Casio have made some weird choices with the CW series. I wonder if this is a glitch or a result of educational advisors insisting that the calculators handle everything exactly as written, and effectively making the x10^ button pretty much useless.

[@mrstewartphysics]

Good points, well made. I think Casio are just pushing users to input calculations as they are naturally written. It’s like any new system, just takes time to get used to.

[@tombesports7213]

Same things happen with the 2nd gen model like ms, es and es plus. It's not an abnormal thing for us

[@SarahStrong-bc3ve]

I just noticed this yesterday when I borrowed my daughter’s calculator to do some preparation for my A level physics lesson. I have seen kids have this problem on the old calculators when physically typing in x 10 ^ 4 rather than using the standard form button and I always had to train them that that was what the standard button was for to attach it to the number without the brackets but it doesn’t work any more. And the annoying thing is that if you do use brackets you have to be careful as the end bracket just goes round the power unless you press the sideways arrow to stop it being superscript. Rubbish for doing quick physics calculations. I have emailed casio

[@mrstewartphysics]

Unless students (and teachers) are made aware of this, some students could potentially lose a lot of marks in exams unless they have an intuitive grasp of ‘power of ten’ arithmetic. This ‘could’ be the difference between pass and fail for some kids.

[@brightawe9002]

​@@mrstewartphysics I would sue. It's crazy that a calculator can cause such failure.

[@jack002tuber]

This is not an error. You have given this calculator a CHAIN OPERATION with a DIVISION in it. You have to specify WHERE the denominator starts and ends using (), else it can only guess. The answer you got was not an error

[@mrstewartphysics]

@@jack002tuber you’ve missed the point. The old calculators automatically joined the exponent to the mantissa. What else would you be doing after hitting the ‘x10^x’ button. That sensible functionality has gone.

[@lordlucan529]

@@mrstewartphysics Clearly a maths pedant has joined Casio. “=“ isn’t really equals hence exe, and this too. Previous generations of pocket calculators were designed by engineers for engineers and scientists, who almost exclusively represent numbers in this format with the exponent and mantissa joined. Now they are aimed at high school kids. Important calculations are now going to be wrong, in the real world with real consequences. Edit: I seem to recall this button used to be called EXP? Presumably it was there just for the syntax of entering literal values into the calculation, and didn’t behave this way.

[@xxjbboiiixx6243]

Hey mate, Here is a lil tip on to get it in standard form. 1st step:settings 2nd step:press calc settings. 3rd step: go to number format. ,final step:press norm and choose 1. Which will give you ans in 1.23x10^-3 form. Hope it helped😊

[@saujanyapoudel8910]

That was not his point. 8x10^-4 is actually 0.0008 so 686/8x10^-4 is really just 686/0.0008 therefore the answer should be 857500. As you can notice the final answer is very large number but the calculator treated 10^-4 as a separate number of its own so it divided 686 by 8 rather than 0.008 and multiplied it by 10^-4 giving an answer of 8.57x10^-3 which is not the correct answer. He was just demonstrating how the calculator gives you different answer if you're unaware of what it is doing.

[@xxjbboiiixx6243]

Oh sry mb

[@Smile-ml4no]

ily thank you so much

[@G0FUW]

Just found the same issue for our amateur radio exam calculations - aaarrggghh. I found the opening a bracket before the ENG notation seems to work. Pure bonkers.

[@Moonzzie]

I think its better cause now it follows the rules of operations correctly, and you should input it properly with brackets.

[@wgoinv4923]

Yes , it’s always / 8.0 then / 10^-4 People get used to wrong way but refused to correct. And that’s also prefer by teacher…… that’s why student doesn’t even know how maths work

[@MartinBeerbom]

Thanks for telling me. I'm doing math tutoring, and the new CW series are the new standard in all schools here. I will have to be on my toes to help my students on this. I CANNOT just switch calcs (I do use a different one, mostly a clone of the old HP RPN, for me privately and checking exam question), because my students MUST need to work with it.

[@albert31ize]

Thank you for this video. I just got myself this calculator as my university did not allow me to take a more advanced calculator into the exam. The ENG button is essential, and this implementation is form Casio is so stupid. It made it so tedious to add bracket everytime and make it so prone to carelessness

[@TechStuff365]

Takes a lot of getting used to. I'm still looking for the factorial ! Function. Go into settings, input/output, then change format to linei/lineo for non fraction output.

[@sifatredwan4533]

@johnsealey5334 click catalog then probablity then you'll see the factorial button

[@TechStuff365]

@@sifatredwan4533 Aha, thankyou.

[@bmansdahl9608]

I am a calculator freak, have 45+ of them in a drawer. All of them do this calculations the same way as the fx-82CW, even the graph calculators. The only calculators getting it "right" are my HP-calculators. Can't go wrong with RPN ❤

[@richardbush3593]

Bought one this morning, discovered the same issue, taking it back this afternoon.

[@BlazertronGames]

Visually it makes more sense, though, even though it will cause confusion. The new one doesn't implicitly put brackets around the 8.0*10^-4. It's not giving the wrong answer, 686 / 8.0 * 10^-4 is what the new one gives, which makes sense since you didn't put any brackets to group the (8.0 * 10^-4) to make sure 686/8 doesn't happen first. It doesn't seem like an "issue" with the calculator, it actually seems more like the old ones were misleading, but since they've been around for so long, they're expected to work that way. If you treat Ans like a variable, Ans/10*2 looks like Ans should be divided by 10 first, then multiplied by 2, but what the old calcs did is more like Ans/(10*2) which isn't as obvious unless you're told it does it that way. Or maybe I'm understanding it wrong. Is this a change with all new casio calculators, or just this model in particular. Because it would make sense if they're changing all of the new ones, but if it's *only* this one, then that's weird. I tried it on a TI calculator simulator app, and it also gives the "wrong" answer. I think the reason it works separately from the fractional view, is because something like 686 --------- 8 * 10^-4 typically treats the top and bottom as separate, but if you rewrote the equation as 686 / 8 * 10^-4 most people would do it differently, using order of operations, left to right. So in my opinion, this change makes more sense, even if it will be confusing for people used to the old ones. But it means that the x10^ button doesn't really have a purpose, I suppose. Maybe they should've just changed it so the button inserts the brackets to show you what's actually happening.

[@BlazertronGames]

Yeah, I saw a blog post, it says that it's technically correct, but will be confusing for people. I don't think it's a bad change, though, at least once it phases out the older ones. It encourages formatting it properly using the brackets.

[@mrstewartphysics]

I like your point that the x10^ button doesn’t really have a point now. The power (no pun intended) of this button used to be that it automatically joined the mantissa and the exponent. No need for brackets. That joy has now gone.

[@BlazertronGames]

@@mrstewartphysics I see what you mean. It still saves typing 4 buttons X 1 0 then the exponent button, but yeah, I think the better alternative would've been to maintain the behaviour, but visually insert brackets to show what's happening.

[@PatrickCulliton]

​@@BlazertronGames I like this proposal best. You keep the speed of the old calculator and now have the formula clarity with the added brackets.

[@kevinpeterman7127]

Since I started using scientific calculators with the HP35 in the 70s the 10^ key has always been used to apply as if you are using scientific notation. That's quite a long history to go back on over many different brands to include TI and HP. not only that but many people do not include the brackets when doing hand calculations on paper. It also saddens me because Casio has been my go to brand due to the excessive cost and underperforming TI models and hard to get antique HP ones (that I actually prefer).

[@fazedk3097]

Do you know how to get the select button for binomial expansion? Im really stuck, and theyre useless to answer me

[@chloed7002]

I’m here for the same reason, have u figured it out yet?

[@fazedk3097]

@@chloed7002 go into the catalogue, and it's there as just c for some reason, not ncr

[@ivanbogush]

It seems the people at Casio misunderstood what the [x10] button actually did. It never multiplied anything by 10! It made the number before it the mantissa and the number after it the exponent, giving a single number in standard form. The button used to be called [EXP] on models going back to the VFD days, which really drives home its purpose: 8 [x10] -4 == 8 [EXP] -4 == 8E-4 No-one can possibly argue that 686/8E-4 meant "686 / 8 x 10^-4" since 8E-4 just a number, not a calculation waiting to happen. If the renamed key was causing confusion, they should have just renamed it back to [EXP] instead of changing the function of the key to something far less useful after 40+ years.

[@mrstewartphysics]

@@ivanbogush my sources tell me that the latest edition of this calculator has had this issue corrected and the button now operates as before. I have yet to see this myself but hope the original functionality has been restored. The notation on the button is better as (x10^x) for me as this is how we write our numbers in standard form. Great comment. Whole heartedly agree with you.

[@LeRoi81]

It calcs 686/8 and then x10^(-4), so you have to use brackets or the fraction function.

[@mrstewartphysics]

I know. The older models of the calculator automatically joined the ‘x10^n’ to the preceding number. This no longer works. A downgrade in my opinion. The fraction button is the way to go now.

[@Crazytesseract]

​@@mrstewartphysicsBut they should not have done this. If old Casio users discover this much later, it is a serious issue.

[@modularcarpet]

Wow! It almost seems like a bug in the programming of the calculator. Well spotted!

[@brightawe9002]

​@@Crazytesseractthis can cause failure!!!

[@DerekDavis213]

To get the correct result on the CW calculator, just use parentheses around the denominator: (8 x 10^-4)

[@saujanyapoudel8910]

The point of the "x10" button is to save you the time of entering parenthesis around the number. What's the point of it if it requires you to put a parentheses anyways??

[@MartinBeerbom]

The point of the "x10^x" has ALWAYS been to enter numbers as "xEy" (as a unit, with implied brackets around it). It was NOT to calculate "x*10^y", which is what the upper block functions are for.

[@davethomson5921]

The worst feature is if you use ANS and then divide by a number in Scientific notation you still need the brackets ( eg if 3 is the answer. Then ANS x 1x10^2 AND ANS / 1x10^2 both give the same value - 300). To require brackets for all division in Scientific notation is just ludicrous. I agree all CW are hopeless for Physics students and will just lead to failure. These cheap & nasty CW calculators have flooded the market and so many have purchased them believing them to be an upgrade. The old models are selling on Amazon and EBay at a much higher price for a reason.

[@Khemani_RL]

Yep, I made the big mistake of spending £26 on one of these new calculators thinking I was getting an upgrade; worst decision ever 😢 I’m sticking to my old Casio fx-85GT Plus

[@mrstewartphysics]

You are correct sir. It’s ridiculous. I’ve started buying old models on reseller sites that aren’t crazy prices. I saw an fx83 gtx on eBay for £80 yesterday😳

[@Pellidon]

fx-991CW does it too. Probably all CW variants.

[@saujanyapoudel8910]

Cw series is really a horrible follow up for the brilliant ClassWiz series.

[@DoYaRememberMe]

Or you have to use brackets same concept on the basic old models never knew that a casio could actually do that right away

[@JoshHorton-lz9vz]

I think its a change in how the calculator reads what your typing in to how we're used to it. You type in 686/8.0x10^-4, which you read as 686/(8.0x10^-4), but what the calculator is reading is (686/8.0)x10^-4. This can be easily proved by working out what 686/8 is, then multiplying the answer by 10^-4. I think the problem is, how calculators used to read x10^ was as the previous method, and how we'd naturally read that (probably because thats how calculators used to read them) is now read by the calculator as different. I think its important to state that because if you're doing a calculation that has something like a/b-cx10^d, where you've used the fraction button, it will give the wrong answer, because the bottom of the fraction is still read as (b-c)x10^d and not as we would read it as b-(cx10^d). I think its just something we have to get used to with the new calculators, and I can't see casio reverting to the old method. I think a rule of thumb should be "if in doubt, use brackets"

[@mrstewartphysics]

You are correct, but the ease of use of the ‘old’ calculator automatically connected the exponent to the mantissa. Saved a few button pushes

[@simonmullen2621]

Very helpful. From a maths tutor in Cambridge.

[@thessianheart9816]

Why not just input 686÷8÷10^-4? Simple and no need for brackets. Works on all calcs.

[@scarlett8445]

It doesn't have a button for exponentials, which is honestly ridiculous

[@MartinBeerbom]

It has constant e (via shift-8) and an y^x button.

[@viscourtroy]

Like the custom style... I am!

[@lukecarey613]

It looks the same as my CASIO fx8200 AU.

[@saujanyapoudel8910]

Maybe because Casio rebrands its models with different names for different regions

[@jamesjefferson8916]

when i press ON or HOME or if the calculator is off, all calculation history is gone. Is there anyway to keep the calculation history?

[@saujanyapoudel8910]

Unless you get their graphing models Casio's calculators can't keep calculations history. Though In the new CW models switching to one of the modes doesn't erase the data already inputted into the other mode (matrix, statistics) etc as long as you don't press the 'on' button but its gone once you restart the calculator.

[@reload2832]

what is the point of that button even being there anymore

[@jjnevis]

One keystroke instead of 4, that's all.

[@rayhanplayz968]

What about Fx 85 GTX?

[@mrstewartphysics]

Great calculator, solar powered.

[@viscourtroy]

83 GTX VS 85 GTX? Which one is better?

[@sonof316]

Does anyone know where the NCR button is?

[@nmh83]

This wrong answer occurs when you input the sum on an iPhone calculator too

[@katiecorcoran3797]

Anyone know how to use the anti log button as well for this??

[@milnesphysics8327]

Hope nasa engineering don’t use this for the next moon landing!

[@bmansdahl9608]

😂

[@saujanyapoudel8910]

I have noticed most of the professionals who had used calculators a lot in their studies just tend to use their PC for calculations in their work. I don't think NASA employees would be using sluggish calculators when they have computer softwares in their next click.

[@declankruppa8300]

can you recommend an alternative scientific calculator for schools?

[@mrstewartphysics]

Well the old Casio Fx83/85s are discontinued so schools will just have to go with the new Casio school standard and make sure students are familiar with the new process of carrying out calculations correctly.

[@frederickwong4390]

Seriously? I assume it is not 1st of April.

[@donaldthomson9411]

Next stop eBay for the old version . New version filed in bin.

[@mrstewartphysics]

Watch out Donald the old ones are selling for up to £80🥴

[@Khemani_RL]

@@mrstewartphysicsyeah I saw the ridiculous prices, but decided to still buy the newer one anyway; it was the worst decision ever 😢 I’ve made more calculator errors than ever before. I’m loosing easy marks just because of this stupid calculator not working the way it should

[@kamrankabir8101]

please would you recommend which calculator to buy just started gcses

[@thomaspaine5601]

FX-83GT Plus (Not the CW version) the old version

[@kev4623]

​@@thomaspaine5601 they don't sell that anywhere

[@IntelligentProbe]

It's doing the division first and then the power.... if you put it in parenthesis it'll give the right answer.

[@mrstewartphysics]

@@IntelligentProbe yes I know, but that is additional button presses compared to previous models. My point was that if you were a seasoned veteran of usage of the older Fx83/5 you didn’t need to use brackets with the older models. The whole point of the ‘x10^x’ button was that it acted as a macro and effectively did the parenthesis for you (without explicitly showing it) and automatically joined the mantissa and exponent. That was the whole point of the original functionality of the button. I realise it’s more ‘mathematically’ correct now but it increases the complexity of data handling and is a big change for those folks, like myself, who were used to the old system.

[@agwoo-music]

i know it is quite expencive but may i recoment a ti 84? honestly i got it to replace my casio fx-83gtx and my fx-83gt cw that my school provided and i never want to use a casio ever again. not sure if it can be used in exsams tho

[@Crackie]

You could rant about a thousand things that make this worse and more impractical compared to the great fx991ex, like the catalog button, the tools, the function and the fact that you have to navigate through menus to do a simple operation. But you chose to rant about the way it handles the bodmas/pemdas stuff. It is actually more correct now than before. When you have a single line, and you divide and then multiply, these two are done in the way that they are written. Teachers always say, especially in programming classes, to be aware of the fact that in fractions everything down there should be in brackets. At the end of the day, the fraction button is the best, and maybe the x10 button would be better if it would just put brackets on it's own to help people understand.

[@jimmydishkawnt]

Uh oh, i just bought my niece her first scientific calculator for hs. Its a fx-991cw, and iirc the buttons look the same. Hope it does not give her the same problem. Unfortunately I Did not check it before giving it to her

[@ProxyFoxOne]

I hate this calculator after learning about this issue. Returning mine.

[@Khemani_RL]

Yes same here! I wasted £26 on this hot mess 😢 I don’t know if I can even get a refund. I bought it from Tesco supermarket 😞

[@jack002tuber]

@@Khemani_RL There's nothing wrong with it. You want the right answer, then use ( and ). It is not an error

[@saujanyapoudel8910]

​@@jack002tuberof course it won't cause a world destruction but they just missed the whole point behind the x10 button. The worse part is people are habitual of using 'x10' button without brackets and they would think CW also works that way.

[@cchimozmin]

What calculation is it doing to get the wrong answer. It’s worse than not having a calculator at all

[@missdixyd]

I think it’s using bodmas as a normal calculation

[@dimaminiailo3723]

@@missdixyd the *10^ has always been going before all other multiplications because it's not the usual multiplication but a separate number's part. the usual power to x doesn't work the same

[@monikawillms]

Hi, is there something I don't understand...From my point of view only the last calculator is correct. It did follow order of tasks so 686 got divided by 8.0 first and then got multiplied so result 0.008575 is correct.

[@b28mathstutor]

If you were typing in "times 10 to the power -4" then you'd expect to get that answer, but they've changed how the ×10^x button works. When you're using the ×10^x button it's normally considered to be part of the same number. So when you use that button (on the older calcs) you're not doing 686 ÷ 8 × 10^-4, but 686 ÷ (8×10^-4). On the older calculators the × symbols is smaller to show this, but the new one treats it like the former calculation.

[@jjnevis]

I think Casio got this one right. The button is simply labelled "x10^n", so that's what you're inserting into your text (on a single line) before asking the calculator to parse it according to the rules. The issue arises due to computer text input being a linear (single line) process and the convention that a "/" character only applies to the following number/variable. Since calculators are now small computers it makes sense to be consistent with the rules. The author's desire to retain the legacy behaviour is incorrect in my opinion. The correct behaviour is either to use the fraction button as he explains, or use brackets if choosing to input the calculation on a single input line. Either way, the calculator is functioning correctly and in future all calculators will function this way.

[@TheEddie581]

the 10x buttons is there to save you time. Insisting at "consistent" behaviour at the detriment of operational efficiency is ridiculous.

[@jjnevis]

@@TheEddie581 Sorry, I don't follow your comment, could you expand a little to try and improve the clarity of your argument? Thanks

[@TheEddie581]

@@jjnevis The new behaviour is illogical and against standard algebra rules. The standard, immutable order of evaluation is : power, multiply, divide, add and subtract . Like mr stewart physics does, he divides 686 by 8*10^-4. In the correct algebraic order, the multiplying of 8*10^-4 MUST therefore be done before the division. The Casio fx-83GT CW does NOT do this. it divides 686 by 8 and THEN multiplies with 10^-4. The only way to get the correct operation, brackets must be inserted to enforce the correct order. This is ludicrousand against the standard order of evaluation.

[@jjnevis]

@@TheEddie581 multiply and divide have equal precedence and are therefore done in order of appearance from left to right.

[@jjnevis]

@@TheEddie581 you coming round? Or do I still have more persuading to do? (I'm happy to be persuaded the other way :)

[@monikawillms]

Answer which is 686: (8.0 ×10 -4)= 857.500😂 The button mentioned by viewer works correctly. You can set decimal answer to appear every time on screen, there is a video on youtube how to do it.

[@ashleymulenga9115]

My uni said they only allow Casio fx 83 and 85. I have never used a Casio calculator in my life cuz I've always thought they're settup was impractical. Reguadless, I unknowingly ordered the 85 expecting it to be the best model out of them all, but it was the worst decision of my life. So time consuming pressing all extra buttons for nothing in exams just for it to give me the wrong answer in the end. This has to be the worst invention in recent times and wouldn't recommend it's usage to even my worst enemy. The annoying part is the manufacturers think this monstrosity is an improvement. So disappointing.

[@mrstewartphysics]

I agree, poor show from Casio.😡

[@harry011984]

Great. I just bought this calculator!

[@mrstewartphysics]

you'll get used to it :)

[@MartyPhysics]

Can be done using brackets, but defo not nice as the bracket needs to shifted after inputting the power.

[@mrstewartphysics]

I know, it’s a total pain in the neck if you are used to the older way of doing it, but hey-ho there you go!

[@d8chetae]

Or you can just place brackets around the 8.0x10^-4 So, ANS ÷ (8.0x10^-4)

[@JohnSmith-pd2dq]

Press the "Shift" button first then press the "EXE" to get your answers in decimals every time!.... you dont have to use the "Format" button ... Done!!! ... long live casio Fx-991CW ....

[@DerekDavis213]

In some cases, shift-EXE does not give the same result as using Format-->Decimal. Try it.

[@krishan9946]

In short you can calculate it like this: 70*9.8÷8÷10^-4. I think it calculates from left to right one by one

[@blaser80]

That's quite a disappointing change; having used a Casio since the mid-90s starting with the fx-570s. I was already somewhat annoyed at the new round buttons and the print just isn't as readable as the older models.

[@peterwilson7532]

I will be sticking to my RPN calculators where all this parenthesis BODMAS, PEMDAS nonsense doesn't even exist. Be one with the Stack. Ambiguity be gone I say, as I reveal my HP or SwissMicros calculator.

[@AnnoyingOllie]

this can be annoying, but following the rules of BIDMAS does technically mean it works correctly

[@TheLeeCartoon]

You do not have to use the fraction button. In fact, if there was a calculation on the bottom part with the standard form you’d suffer the same fate. Actually, what you need to do is put the standard form into brackets. If you do that it will work out without the fraction button too. It’s because it is doing the whole calculation left to write and is not dividing by the power of 10 along with the number. Put in brackets and then it will. You’re welcome.

[@mrstewartphysics]

You totally missed the point

[@TheLeeCartoon]

No I didn’t. You are saying the nex calculator does not do the calculation the same way the old calculator is. Put the standard form into brackets and try the calculation again. It’s not hard.

[@TheLeeCartoon]

Further more, saying you have to use the fraction button is misinformation. You do not have to use the fraction button.

[@mrstewartphysics]

You are correct, you can use brackets but have you tried it? The ‘close’ bracket ends up superscripted along with the power of 10…..so…you actually need three additional button pushes (open bracket, cursor right, close bracket) to achieve the same result as the previous models. What a pest! I’ve just done 4 x 5^2 on the new Casio and get 100. No need for brackets because there is a dedicated ‘squared’ button that only squares the previously pressed buttons value. You don’t need to press 4 x (5^2). Aha! you say that’s because the ‘squared button’ is a dedicated button and only squares the previously pressed button and there’s no need for brackets……..well so is the ‘x10^x’ button. It’s a dedicated button that joins a mantissa and an exponent (or at least the older models did). It has no other function…but alas, its dedicated functionality has become strangely obsolete. It is, as we say in Scotland, about as much use as a chocolate teapot. Apologies for my ‘misinformation’ but go ahead and use the 3 extra button bracket strategy if you wish. I’ll use the zero extra button fraction strategy.

[@TheLeeCartoon]

Let’s say you do use the fraction function, what you are not telling people is that when you have a division calculation in the denominator you will also need to use a fraction. So you end up with a fraction within a fraction. What a way to over complicate it for people. And the argument over more button presses is obsolete, since you have to use the directional button to change between numerator and denominator anyway, plus you have to press the fraction button in the first place. And you’ve got the complication of whether you press the fraction button first or after typing the numerator (depends if students are forward thinking). I’d say one or two extra buttons is the lesser of two evils.

[@jaimeestarellas5206]

I bought the new one recently, and it is absolute garbage. I am trying to look for a refund, I was told it was EXACTLY the same as the classic one, and that cannot be further than reality.

[@Khemani_RL]

Same here! I wasted my money on this pathetic excuse of a calculator 😢😞

[@keithhobbs1]

Nearly as good as some versions of Excel could come up with a correlation coefficient of more than 1😢

[@davidstewart4570]

Wow, well spotted. Bought this for my son yesterday as he's required to have it in senior school. This seems like a significant shortcoming.

[@tombesports7213]

Btw you can get that exact answer by those old methods. If you get the latest casio calculator like 2nd gen ms, es, es plus then you have to do like this. You can't get that exact answer with that old method. You have to use brackets. Or ×10 will be count as a different part of that calculation. I don't why people are getting so f up by this thing. For me, It was a normal thing. Instead i thought that the old calculator had a problem or something lmao

[@pfhwec0]

You needed to put the '(' and ')' to force presidence. You should have done it this way Ans/ (8x10^-4). Divide took presidence over multiplication.

[@mrstewartphysics]

The whole point of a dedicated ‘x10^’ button was to automatically connect mantissa and exponent and treat the entered value as a single number. This functionality has now gone.

[@madarab]

Multiplication and division are equal operations so the calcutor will go simply from left to right.

[@Manticore1960]

My old Sharp EL-531X also gives the same (correct) result as the older Casios. The Sharp has an Exp button, which performs the same function as the x10^x button. Even though I follow the BEDMAS rule, I still think the newer Casio gives the wrong result. The reason being that if you want to follow BEDMAS you would use the multiplication button (X) before the Exp or x10^x button. If you don’t use the multiplication button first, then it seems logical to me that the Exp or x10^x function should apply only to the term immediately before it.

[@mrstewartphysics]

Yup, that’s my point, the automatic connection of the x10^x button was the whole point of that exclusive button. That functionality has now gone but hey-ho there you go.

[@plantinpot5712]

You need to use brackets

[@fastjane1]

These new calculators are completely useless for my students who are extremely low level students. I can barely get my head around it and now it is so complex that I will not be moving to the new version. Instead I am hoarding the old versions, buying second hand where I can. I even found some simular knock offs on temu for $5 each that I will buy for my stduents out of my own money if I have to. Casio have really messed up. I feel for the kids.

[@Khemani_RL]

I regret purchasing this calculator. Waste of my cash 😢 All I wanted was a good calculator upgrade. 😞

[@eoinn5112]

It's horrible! I lost my calculator and I have my maths GCSE in less than 2 months and I was forced to buy this new calculator and I have no idea how to use it and Casio don't even sell their old models anymore.

[@mrstewartphysics]

WH Smith sell a calculator that is pretty much a copy of the old fx83.

[@JazzBerri]

Wtf? So what use does the X10 button have then? That calculator is useless!

[@viscourtroy]

Please do not accept the CW, even have the faster chip to compute. Hard to use...

[@cchimozmin]

Ans/8.0 x 10-4 gives the wrong answer. Immediately don’t trust it.

[@berniesweeney2799]

I really hate this calculator too.

[@lawrencewinter]

It's awful. What on earth were they thinking?

[@thomaspaine5601]

The old fx-83GT plus calculator is a fabulous calculator. The latest cw version looks and feels cheaply built. The display characters are smaller and harder to read. Many operations need more button presses to achieve the same thing. I do not like it. It has caused the price of the old fx83 GT plus calculators to soar on eBay! Can't believe Casio has discontinued the old calculator. Casio made such good calculators, they had completely cornered the market wiping out other companies like Sharp et cetera but they really have lost the plot with the last two iterations of this market-leading calculator.

[@mrstewartphysics]

A definite cheap replacement and an all-round poorer quality “upgrade”. As you say older models are selling for a pretty price on eBay. Think I’ll hold onto my ‘vintage’ models for a few more years🙂

[@im_n0_pro]

U are not accounting for bidmas

[@bhav-mj5vv]

Hello!

[@calhutchi3491]

How peculiar

[@AA-ku6lf]

i guess there are now plenty of cell phone maths apps and they are at the level the calcs can never be, the new generations just learn from them.

[@user-cu2ym7ol5r]

You can use the brackets instead. WHat it is doing is 686/8.0 and then x10-4. If you bracket the 8.0 x 10-4 you'll be ok. It's still a rubbish calculator and I'd now advise buying one of the supermarkets own brand. Terrible calculator. Casio says it is due to the chipset being hard to get and copycat calculators. BTW can I advise setting the calculator up first so you get maths I decimal O, digit separator, recurring off, etc

[@mrstewartphysics]

Great comment!

[@SimonJackson13]

Definite floating point malfunction.

[@mocarroll9398]

Engineer doing maths all day long for past 40 years. This product is Rubbish, cannot add 2 and 2 on it.