Benchmark: Date Test speed parse iso vs ts

Tests:

Parse ISO
new Date("2021-01-25T17:26:27Z")
Parse TS
new Date(1611595587000)

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 6 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 6 runs

Parse TS

37.1M/s

Parse ISO

11.6M/s

Fastest: Parse TS (3.2x faster)

View exact numbers

✓ Parse TS: 37,075,720 ops/sec
• Parse ISO: 11,595,450 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
Parse ISO
Parse TS

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: one month ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/151.0.0.0 Safari/537.36 Edg/151.0.0.0

Browser/OS: Chrome 151 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Parse TS

41.5M/s

Parse ISO

12.4M/s

View exact numbers

Test name	Executions per second
✓ Parse TS	41,495,600 Ops/sec
Parse ISO	12,415,523 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the provided benchmark and explain what's being tested.

**Benchmark Overview**

The MeasureThat.net website allows users to create and run JavaScript microbenchmarks. The provided benchmark is designed to measure the speed of parsing date strings in different formats: ISO (International Organization for Standardization) and TS (short for "Unix Time", which represents the number of seconds since January 1, 1970).

**Options Being Compared**

There are two options being compared:

1. **ISO**: This option tests the performance of parsing a date string in the ISO format, which is `YYYY-MM-DDTHH:MM:SSZ`. For example: `new Date("2021-01-25T17:26:27Z")`.
2. **TS**: This option tests the performance of parsing a date string in Unix Time format, represented as a number of seconds since January 1, 1970. For example: `new Date(1611595587000)`.

**Pros and Cons**

* **ISO Format**:
	+ Pros: Widely used and understood format, especially for international dates.
	+ Cons: May require additional parsing steps to extract the individual date components (year, month, day, hour, minute, second).
* **TS Format**:
	+ Pros: Simple and compact representation of a date and time, suitable for many use cases.
	+ Cons: Limited to Unix Time format, which may not be suitable for all applications.

**Library and Special JS Feature**

Neither of the benchmark options uses any libraries or special JavaScript features that would require additional explanation. The parsing is a basic operation that can be performed using the built-in `Date` constructor in JavaScript.

**Other Alternatives**

If you were to compare these two options, other alternatives might include:

* **RFC 3339**: Another widely used date and time format, which includes many variants of ISO 8601.
* **JavaScript Date API extensions**: Some modern JavaScript libraries or frameworks may provide additional date parsing capabilities beyond the built-in `Date` constructor.

**Benchmark Preparation Code**

The provided benchmark preparation code is empty, suggesting that the user wants to focus solely on comparing the performance of the two options being tested. If you wanted to add more complexity to your benchmark, you could include some basic setup or prep work in this section, such as initializing variables or creating a sample dataset.

**Individual Test Cases**

The individual test cases are designed to measure the execution speed of parsing each date string format. By comparing these results across different browsers and devices, users can gain insights into how their application's performance will be affected by the choice of date format.

Date Test speed parse iso vs ts (version: 0) Benchmark.js

Comparing performance of: `Parse ISO vs Parse TS`

Created: 5 years ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

Parse ISO

Parse TS

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 6 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 6 runs

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

Date Test speed parse iso vs ts (version: 0) Benchmark.js

Comparing performance of: Parse ISO vs Parse TS

Created: 5 years ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

Parse ISO

Parse TS

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 6 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 6 runs

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

Related benchmarks

Comparing performance of: `Parse ISO vs Parse TS`