Toggle navigation
MeasureThat
.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
toFixed vs Math.round() 2
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
+toFixed(2) vs Math.round(*100)/100
Created:
5 years ago
by:
Guest
Go to the latest result
Script Preparation code:
var someFloat = 0.123456789;
Tests:
+toFixed(2)
+someFloat.toFixed(2);
Math.round(*100)/100
Math.round(someFloat*100)/100;
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
+toFixed(2)
Math.round(*100)/100
Fastest:
N/A
Slowest:
N/A
Latest run results:
Run details:
(Test run date:
one year ago
)
User agent:
Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/131.0.0.0 Safari/537.36
Browser/OS:
Chrome 131 on Mac OS X 10.15.7
View result in a separate tab
Embed
Embed Benchmark Result
<iframe src="https://measurethat.net/Embed?id=569991" width="100%" height="500px"></iframe>
Math.round(*100)/100
11.3M/s
+toFixed(2)
9.3M/s
View exact numbers
Test name
Executions per second
✓
Math.round(*100)/100
11,252,669 Ops/sec
+toFixed(2)
9,283,837 Ops/sec
Autogenerated LLM Summary
(model
llama3.2:3b
, generated one year ago):
Let's break down the benchmark and its test cases. **What is tested?** The benchmark tests two ways to round a floating-point number: `toFixed()` and `Math.round()`. The goal is to determine which method is faster for rounding numbers with 2 decimal places. **Options compared:** There are two options being compared: 1. **`toFixed(2)`**: This method converts the floating-point number to a string, padding it with zeros if necessary, and then converts the resulting string back to a float. The second argument `2` specifies the minimum number of digits to be included in the formatted string. 2. **`Math.round(*100)/100`**: This method first multiplies the floating-point number by 100 to shift its decimal point two places to the right, then rounds it using `Math.round()`, and finally divides the result by 100 to restore the original decimal point. **Pros and cons of each approach:** 1. **`toFixed(2)`**: * Pros: + More readable code (less magic numbers) + May be more intuitive for developers familiar with string formatting * Cons: + Requires creating a string, which can be slower than arithmetic operations + May not work well with very large or very small numbers due to precision issues 2. **`Math.round(*100)/100`**: * Pros: + Faster, as it only involves arithmetic operations + More robust, as it doesn't require creating a string * Cons: + Less readable code (more magic numbers) + May not be immediately obvious what's happening in the calculation **Library and special JS feature:** There are no libraries used in this benchmark. However, the `Math.round()` function is a built-in JavaScript method. **Special JS feature:** There is no specific JavaScript feature being tested or leveraged in this benchmark. **Other alternatives:** If you want to explore alternative methods for rounding numbers, some options include: 1. **`Number.toFixed(2)`**: This is similar to `toFixed(2)`, but uses a different syntax. 2. **`BigInt`**: For very large or very small numbers, using `BigInt` and `toString()` with a specific radix (e.g., 16 for hexadecimal) might be faster or more efficient. 3. **Third-party libraries**: There are many third-party libraries available that provide optimized rounding functions, such as `lodash.round()`, but these would likely incur performance overhead. Keep in mind that the choice of rounding method depends on the specific use case and requirements of your project.
Related benchmarks
toFixed vs Math.round() - result as a number
toFixed vs toPrecision vs Math.round() to 1 decimal place
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?