3 ms·
> “The best we can hope for is we’re three times faster,” van der Hoeven said. And they talk about billions of digits elsewhere in the article. I doubt that on
by croutonix 6y ago
> “The best we can hope for is we’re three times faster,” van der Hoeven said.
And they talk about billions of digits elsewhere in the article. I doubt that only applies for the ~8.46e184 digits you seem to be talking about.
- jacobolus 6y agoFrom last time this came up, the number of bits in the numbers involved is 2^(9^12). Storing a count of the number of bits takes about 930 billion digits. Actually storing the bits or digits of the numbers per se takes a whole lot more, to say the least. https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-02070778/document https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-02070778/document