3 ms·
So there is a very strong correlation between time taken and energy consumption. This is because less work is done (like you pointed out) and CPUs go back to id
by nindalf 4y ago
So there is a very strong correlation between time taken and energy consumption. This is because less work is done (like you pointed out) and CPUs go back to idle quicker (like I did). This part is blindingly obvious.
There are a few exceptions, but no mechanism that explains that from the paper. So statistical noise.
If anyone is designing a language to be energy efficient, they would do what is obvious - do less work by generating more efficient code (like you said) or make it easy to parallelise work so cores can go back to sleep quicker (like I said). They’re not going to design for something statistical anomalies.
- skohan 4y agoIt’s a computer science paper. They don’t have to present an actionable solution for it to provide value. They have a meaningful new finding, which may provide the missing piece to some solution later on. If we disregarded all scientific inquiry which did not result in an immediate solution to an existing problem, computers probably would not even have been invented by now.
- nindalf 4y agoThe “meaningful new finding” is statistical noise that only affects a few data points. You’ve written hundreds of words without addressing that core issue. Eager to hear your thoughts on this once you’ve organised them.