Benchmark: memory test - MeasureThat.net

Tests:

const in memory
const a = 4;
let in memory
let a = 4;

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
const in memory
let in memory

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 10 months ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; ) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chromium/120.0.6099.5 Chrome/120.0.6099.5 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chromium 120 on Linux

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
const in memory	433921600.0 Ops/sec
let in memory	412147872.0 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

**Overview**

MeasureThat.net is a website that allows users to create and run JavaScript microbenchmarks. A benchmark is a standardized test that measures the performance of a piece of code or a specific feature in JavaScript.

The provided JSON represents two individual test cases, each with its own Benchmark Definition and Test Name.

**Benchmark Definition**

The Benchmark Definition is a string that describes the code to be executed by the benchmark. In this case, there are two Benchmark Definitions:

1. `const a = 4;`
2. `let a = 4;`

These definitions specify the JavaScript code that will be executed during the benchmark.

**Comparison of Options**

In these test cases, the options being compared are:

* **`const` vs. `let`**: The two main differences between `const` and `let` are:
	+ **Immutability**: `const` variables cannot be reassigned, while `let` variables can.
	+ **Scope**: Both `const` and `let` variables have function scope, but `const` has block scope as well.
* **Memory allocation**: The main difference between the two options is how memory is allocated:
	+ `const` variables are stored in a constant location in memory, which means that the memory address does not change even after reassignment (although the value itself may be changed).
	+ `let` variables are stored on the stack, which means that their memory allocation changes when they are reassigned.

**Pros and Cons**

Here are some pros and cons of each approach:

* **`const`**
	+ Pros:
		- Memory safety: since `const` variables cannot be reassigned, it prevents accidental overwriting of other variables.
		- Performance: since the memory location does not change, constant reassignments are likely to be faster.
	+ Cons:
		- Immutability can limit flexibility in certain situations.
* **`let`**
	+ Pros:
		- Flexibility: `let` variables can be reassigned, which can be useful in certain situations.
	- Performance: since the memory allocation changes with each reassignment, it may lead to performance overhead.

**Library and Special JS Feature**

There are no libraries or special JavaScript features being used in these test cases. The benchmark only executes basic JavaScript code using built-in syntax.

**Other Considerations**

When writing a benchmark like this, it's essential to consider the following:

* **Consistency**: Ensure that all variables and conditions are consistent throughout the benchmark.
* **Repeatability**: Make sure that the benchmark is repeatable and produces consistent results across multiple runs.
* **Scalability**: Benchmarking should be able to scale up or down depending on the specific requirements of the code being tested.

**Alternatives**

If you were writing a similar benchmark, you could consider the following alternatives:

* Use a more complex Benchmark Definition that incorporates loops, conditional statements, or other control flow constructs.
* Include additional variables or conditions that affect the execution of the benchmark.
* Use different JavaScript engines or environments to compare their performance.

Keep in mind that MeasureThat.net is specifically designed for simple JavaScript microbenchmarks. If you need to benchmark more complex code or use special features, a different approach might be necessary.

Related benchmarks:

memory test (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: const in memory vs let in memory

Created: 5 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

const in memory

let in memory

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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