English technically isn't my first language, but from what I understand having 110% of performance is equal to 1.1x control group performance, gaining 110% of p

English technically isn't my first language, but from what I understand having 110% of performance is equal to 1.1x control group performance, gaining 110% of performance would be 2.1x control group performance. EDIT: Oh, I grokked the comment by mikeyouse and you now. Yes, I see what you mean. Anyway, compare this to optimising code programming: there are big changes like switching algorithms, or more incremental improvements, like re-using arrays to reduce memory allocations. I'd say the former is like changing the type of sports/exercise, and the latter is more like this dietary change. For an incremental optimisation, 1.1x is quite significant, no? (there isn't really an analogy for bulking up though; since there isn't a causal relationship between code size and performance and smaller is considered better)