Large Language Models (LLMs) work surprisingly well for some complex reasoning problems via chain-of-thought (CoT) or tree-of-thought (ToT), but the underlying reasons remain unclear. We seek to understand the performance of these methods by conducting experimental case studies and linking the outcomes to sample and computational complexity in machine learning. We found that if problems can be decomposed into a sequence of reasoning steps and learning to predict the next step has a low sample and computational complexity, explicitly outlining the reasoning chain with all necessary information for predicting the next step may improve performance. Conversely, for problems where predicting the next step is computationally hard, adopting ToT may yield better reasoning outcomes than attempting to formulate a short reasoning chain.