Toggle navigation
MeasureThat
.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
Feature Requests
FAQ
Register
Log In
map vs array
(version: 0)
Benchmark.js
Comparing performance of:
array vs map
Created:
5 years ago
by:
Guest
Go to the latest result
Script Preparation code:
var array = []; for (var i=0; i<300; ++i) { array.push('00' + i); } function hasWithIndexOf(needle) { return array.indexOf(needle) !== -1; } var map = new Set(); array.forEach(item => map.add(item)); function hasWithMap(needle) { return map.has(needle); }
Tests:
array
for (var i=0; i<100; ++i) { hasWithIndexOf('404'); }
map
for (var i=0; i<100; ++i) { hasWithMap('404'); }
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
array
map
Fastest:
N/A
Slowest:
N/A
Latest run results:
Run details:
(Test run date:
one year ago
)
User agent:
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/132.0.0.0 YaBrowser/25.2.0.0 Safari/537.36
Browser/OS:
Yandex Browser 25 on Windows
View result in a separate tab
Embed
Embed Benchmark Result
<iframe src="https://measurethat.net/Embed?id=615803" width="100%" height="500px"></iframe>
map
10.2M/s
array
24K/s
View exact numbers
Test name
Executions per second
✓
map
10,207,052 Ops/sec
array
23,861 Ops/sec
Autogenerated LLM Summary
(model
llama3.2:3b
, generated one year ago):
Let's dive into explaining the provided JSON benchmark data. **Benchmark Definition** The provided JSON defines two benchmarks: 1. **map vs array**: This benchmark compares the performance of using `Set` and `indexOf()` to an array (`push()` and `includes()` methods). The benchmark script creates an array with 300 elements, each represented as a string in the format "00" followed by a number from 0 to 299. Two functions are defined: `hasWithIndexOf(needle)` for the array approach and `hasWithMap(needle)` for the Set approach. The script initializes an empty Set (`map`) and populates it with elements from the array using `forEach()` method. The functions `hasWithIndexOf(needle)` and `hasWithMap(needle)` check if a given value is present in the array or Set, respectively. **Options Compared** The benchmark compares two approaches: * **Array Approach**: Using an array (`push()` and `includes()` methods) * **Set Approach**: Using a Set (`forEach()` method to populate it) **Pros and Cons of Each Approach** * **Array Approach**: + Pros: - Easier to implement for developers familiar with arrays. - No need to create a separate data structure (in this case, a Set). + Cons: - May be slower due to the overhead of searching through large arrays using `indexOf()`. * **Set Approach**: + Pros: - Can be faster for certain use cases, as Sets provide constant-time lookup and insertion. - No need to search through a list of elements (array). + Cons: - Requires creating a separate data structure (a Set), which can have additional memory overhead. **Other Considerations** * The benchmark does not consider other factors that might affect performance, such as array or Set resizing, cache locality, or parallel processing. * The `forEach()` method is used to populate the Set, but it's not clear if this is an optimal implementation for large datasets. **Library and Special JS Features** The benchmark uses the following JavaScript library: * None explicitly mentioned; however, `Set` is a built-in JavaScript object (introduced in ECMAScript 2015). There are no special JavaScript features used in this benchmark.
Related benchmarks
indexOf vs map vs Set vs native Map
Array.findFirst vs Map.has
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?