Re: University rank of Computer Architecture
- From: nmm1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx (Nick Maclaren)
- Date: 30 Mar 2007 08:40:11 GMT
In article <1175201073.655996.198190@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
"MitchAlsup" <MitchAlsup@xxxxxxx> writes:
|>
|> > Both predictions are exponentially hard problems. Further tweaks
|> > will lead to minor gains, at most.
|>
|> Are they really this easy? I thought they were at least NP-complete.
NP complete problems are at MOST exponentially hard - and it is not
known if they are polynomial. So the term "exponentially hard" is
stronger than "NP complete", if a lot vaguer.
Branch prediction could be phrased to be NP complete, but I am not
sure that is the most useful formulation. You can certainly phrase
prefetch prediction to be more complicated than NP complete.
Regards,
Nick Maclaren.
.
- References:
- University rank of Computer Architecture
- From: Davy
- Re: University rank of Computer Architecture
- From: MitchAlsup
- Re: University rank of Computer Architecture
- From: Jan Vorbrüggen
- Re: University rank of Computer Architecture
- From: MitchAlsup
- Re: University rank of Computer Architecture
- From: Bill Todd
- Re: University rank of Computer Architecture
- From: MitchAlsup
- Re: University rank of Computer Architecture
- From: Bill Todd
- Re: University rank of Computer Architecture
- From: Nick Maclaren
- Re: University rank of Computer Architecture
- From: MitchAlsup
- University rank of Computer Architecture
- Prev by Date: Re: University rank of Computer Architecture
- Next by Date: Re: The Perfect Computer - 36 bits?
- Previous by thread: Re: University rank of Computer Architecture
- Next by thread: Peakstream press release
- Index(es):