Benchmark: filter vs slice - MeasureThat.net

Script Preparation code:

var small = Array.from({ length: 10 }, (_, i) => i);
var medium = Array.from({ length: 100 }, (_, i) => i);
var large = Array.from({ length: 1000 }, (_, i) => i);
var xlarge = Array.from({ length: 10000 }, (_, i) => i);
var xxlarge = Array.from({ length: 100000 }, (_, i) => i);
var xxxlarge = Array.from({ length: 1000000 }, (_, i) => i);
var xxxxlarge = Array.from({ length: 10000000 }, (_, i) => i);

var filter = (arr, index) => arr.filter((_, i) => i !== index);

var slice = (arr, index) => [...arr.slice(0 ,index), ...arr.slice(index+1)];

Tests:

filter small
filter(small, 5)
slice small
slice(small, 5)
filter medium
filter(medium, 50)
slice medium
slice(medium, 50)
filter large
filter(large, 500)
slice large
slice(large, 500)
filter xlarge
filter(xlarge, 5000)
slice xlarge
slice(xlarge, 5000)
filter xxlarge
filter(xxlarge, 50000)
slice xxlarge
slice(xxlarge, 50000)
filter xxxlarge
filter(xxxlarge, 50000)
slice xxxlarge
slice(xxxlarge, 500000)

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 7 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 7 runs

filter small

7.1M/s

slice small

7.0M/s

filter medium

2.6M/s

slice medium

2.5M/s

slice large

436K/s

filter large

308K/s

slice xlarge

39K/s

filter xlarge

28K/s

slice xxlarge

2K/s

filter xxlarge

634/s

slice xxxlarge

133/s

filter xxxlarge

56/s

Fastest: filter small (127623.1x faster)

View exact numbers

✓ filter small: 7,096,482 ops/sec
• slice small: 7,030,195 ops/sec
• filter medium: 2,605,267 ops/sec
• slice medium: 2,468,152 ops/sec
• slice large: 435,651 ops/sec
• filter large: 307,952 ops/sec
• slice xlarge: 39,148 ops/sec
• filter xlarge: 27,651 ops/sec
• slice xxlarge: 1,559 ops/sec
• filter xxlarge: 634 ops/sec
• slice xxxlarge: 133 ops/sec
• filter xxxlarge: 56 ops/sec

Results show median performance across all community submissions. Run this benchmark yourself to verify on your device.

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
filter small
slice small
filter medium
slice medium
filter large
slice large
filter xlarge
slice xlarge
filter xxlarge
slice xxlarge
filter xxxlarge
slice xxxlarge

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 5 months ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/146.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 146 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

slice small

7.0M/s

filter small

4.8M/s

slice medium

1.6M/s

filter medium

549K/s

slice large

159K/s

filter large

52K/s

slice xlarge

19K/s

filter xlarge

6K/s

slice xxlarge

2K/s

filter xxlarge

559/s

slice xxxlarge

133/s

filter xxxlarge

47/s

View exact numbers

Test name	Executions per second
✓ slice small	7,030,195 Ops/sec
filter small	4,816,924 Ops/sec
slice medium	1,550,237 Ops/sec
filter medium	548,969 Ops/sec
slice large	158,540 Ops/sec
filter large	51,860 Ops/sec
slice xlarge	18,912 Ops/sec
filter xlarge	5,609 Ops/sec
slice xxlarge	1,559 Ops/sec
filter xxlarge	559 Ops/sec
slice xxxlarge	133 Ops/sec
filter xxxlarge	47 Ops/sec

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one year ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

It seems like you're providing a JSON-formatted string of data that appears to be related to browser performance testing results.

If I were to parse this data, here are some observations and findings:

**Browser Patterns**

The majority of the `RawUAString` values follow a similar pattern: "Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT [version]; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/[version] (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/[version].0.0.0 Safari/[version].36 Edg/[version].0.0.0". The variations in `[version]` and the presence of different `Safari` versions suggest that the data spans a range of browser releases.

**OS and Device Platform**

The `OperatingSystem` and `DevicePlatform` fields are consistently set to "Windows" across all test cases, indicating that these tests were likely run on Windows desktops.

**Test Cases**

There are six distinct test case names: "slice medium", "slice large", "filter large", "slice xlarge", "filter xlarge", "slice xxlarge", and "filter xxlarge". These names suggest a focus on varying the size of data slices (or filters) being tested, possibly to evaluate performance under different conditions.

**Performance Metrics**

The `ExecutionsPerSecond` values provide insight into the relative performance of each test case. For example, the first two test cases ("slice medium" and "slice large") have significantly higher execution rates than the later test cases with larger data slices (e.g., "slice xlarge", "filter xlarge").

**Other Observations**

* Some test cases have very high execution rates (>100 executions per second), while others are much slower (<10 executions per second).
* The majority of tests were performed with Chrome 129, but some had Safari and Edge versions as well.
* There's a notable decrease in performance as the data slice size increases.

Please let me know if you'd like me to extract any specific insights or provide further analysis on these findings!

filter vs slice (version: 0) Benchmark.js

Comparing performance of: `filter small vs slice small vs filter medium vs slice medium vs filter large vs slice large vs filter xlarge vs slice xlarge vs filter xxlarge vs slice xxlarge vs filter xxxlarge vs slice xxxlarge`

Created: 5 years ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

filter small

slice small

filter medium

slice medium

filter large

slice large

filter xlarge

slice xlarge

filter xxlarge

slice xxlarge

filter xxxlarge

slice xxxlarge

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 7 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 7 runs

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one year ago):

filter vs slice (version: 0) Benchmark.js

Comparing performance of: filter small vs slice small vs filter medium vs slice medium vs filter large vs slice large vs filter xlarge vs slice xlarge vs filter xxlarge vs slice xxlarge vs filter xxxlarge vs slice xxxlarge

Created: 5 years ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

filter small

slice small

filter medium

slice medium

filter large

slice large

filter xlarge

slice xlarge

filter xxlarge

slice xxlarge

filter xxxlarge

slice xxxlarge

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 7 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 7 runs

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one year ago):

Comparing performance of: `filter small vs slice small vs filter medium vs slice medium vs filter large vs slice large vs filter xlarge vs slice xlarge vs filter xxlarge vs slice xxlarge vs filter xxxlarge vs slice xxxlarge`