"They also found that the improved accuracy didn’t come at the cost of computation time, only a somewhat increased chip area and power consumption."
Yes. Nothing for free.
Yes. Nothing for free.
> Whereas floating point numbers are polluted with NaN values, posits are cleansed of such unclean special values.
https://www.cs.cornell.edu/courses/cs6120/2019fa/blog/posits...
I can imagine an alternative timeline where it worked like that though.
I also expect that chip area and power consumption for IEEE floating point has been optimized quite a bit more than for this novel number format, so there may be some efficiency left on the table on those particular metrics.
It uses more hardware because the posit is decoded into a floating point larger than a equivalent IEEE754 with the same number of bits. So, the logic units needs to be larger.