Benchmark: compression libraries comparison

HTML Preparation code:

<script src="https://unpkg.com/fflate"></script>
<script src="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/pako/2.0.3/pako.es5.min.js"></script>

Script Preparation code:

var enc = new TextEncoder();
var a = new Uint8Array([...Array(1000000).keys()]);
var b = enc.encode('The quick brown fox jumps over the lazy dog')
var ca = pako.gzip(a)
var cb = pako.gzip(b)

Tests:

unzip pako a
pako.inflate(ca)
unzip pako b
pako.inflate(cb)
zip pako a
pako.deflate(a)
zip pako b
pako.deflate(b)
unzip fflate a
fflate.decompressSync(ca);
unzip fflate b
fflate.decompressSync(cb);
zip fflate a
fflate.gzipSync(a)
zip fflate b
fflate.gzipSync(b)

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 42 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 31 runs

unzip fflate b

1.1M/s

unzip pako b

89K/s

zip fflate b

34K/s

zip pako b

12K/s

unzip fflate a

791/s

unzip pako a

267/s

zip pako a

110/s

zip fflate a

90/s

Fastest: unzip fflate b (12221.2x faster)

View exact numbers

✓ unzip fflate b: 1,102,709 ops/sec
• unzip pako b: 88,884 ops/sec
• zip fflate b: 34,486 ops/sec
• zip pako b: 11,891 ops/sec
• unzip fflate a: 791 ops/sec
• unzip pako a: 267 ops/sec
• zip pako a: 110 ops/sec
• zip fflate a: 90 ops/sec

Firefox 5 runs

unzip fflate b

679K/s

zip fflate b

30K/s

unzip pako b

22K/s

zip pako b

8K/s

unzip fflate a

532/s

unzip pako a

108/s

zip pako a

91/s

zip fflate a

46/s

Fastest: unzip fflate b (14835.6x faster)

View exact numbers

✓ unzip fflate b: 678,909 ops/sec
• zip fflate b: 29,582 ops/sec
• unzip pako b: 21,637 ops/sec
• zip pako b: 7,715 ops/sec
• unzip fflate a: 532 ops/sec
• unzip pako a: 108 ops/sec
• zip pako a: 91 ops/sec
• zip fflate a: 46 ops/sec

Mobile Results:

Chrome 6 runs

unzip fflate b

541K/s

unzip pako b

36K/s

zip fflate b

12K/s

zip pako b

5K/s

unzip fflate a

391/s

unzip pako a

171/s

zip pako a

62/s

zip fflate a

62/s

Fastest: unzip fflate b (8789.1x faster)

View exact numbers

✓ unzip fflate b: 541,084 ops/sec
• unzip pako b: 36,442 ops/sec
• zip fflate b: 11,610 ops/sec
• zip pako b: 5,022 ops/sec
• unzip fflate a: 391 ops/sec
• unzip pako a: 171 ops/sec
• zip pako a: 62 ops/sec
• zip fflate a: 62 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
unzip pako a
unzip pako b
zip pako a
zip pako b
unzip fflate a
unzip fflate b
zip fflate a
zip fflate b

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; rv:138.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/138.0

Browser/OS: Firefox 138 on Mac OS X 10.15

View result in a separate tab

unzip fflate b

983K/s

unzip pako b

73K/s

zip fflate b

71K/s

zip pako b

22K/s

unzip fflate a

714/s

zip pako a

140/s

unzip pako a

130/s

zip fflate a

86/s

View exact numbers

Test name	Executions per second
✓ unzip fflate b	983,431 Ops/sec
unzip pako b	72,853 Ops/sec
zip fflate b	70,717 Ops/sec
zip pako b	22,474 Ops/sec
unzip fflate a	714 Ops/sec
zip pako a	140 Ops/sec
unzip pako a	130 Ops/sec
zip fflate a	86 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

**Benchmark Overview**

MeasureThat.net is a website that allows users to create and run JavaScript microbenchmarks, comparing the performance of different libraries and approaches.

The provided benchmark definition and test cases measure the performance of two popular compression libraries: pako and fflate. The tests focus on compressing and decompressing data using these libraries.

**What is being tested?**

The benchmarks compare the following options:

1. **Compression**: Compressing a large dataset (100,000 bytes) with either pako.gzip or fflate.gzip.
2. **Decompression**: Decompressing the compressed dataset back to its original form using pako.inflate or fflate.decompressSync.
3. **Reverse operations**: Reversing the compression and decompression processes by zipping the original data with either pako.deflate or fflate.gzip.

**Options comparison**

The pros and cons of each approach are as follows:

* **pako**: Pros:
	+ Faster compression and decompression speeds (due to its optimized algorithm).
	+ Smaller binary size.
* Cons:
	+ May not support all file formats.
	+ Can be slower for very large datasets due to memory allocation.
* **fflate**: Pros:
	+ Supports a wider range of file formats.
	+ Can handle very large datasets efficiently.
* Cons:
	+ Slower compression and decompression speeds (due to its more complex algorithm).
	+ Larger binary size.

**Library usage**

In the provided benchmark, pako is used for:

* Compressing data with `pako.gzip`
* Decompressing data with `pako.inflate`

fflate is used for:

* Compressing data with `fflate.gzipSync`
* Decompressing data with `fflate.decompressSync`

**Special JS features or syntax**

None of the provided benchmark code uses any special JavaScript features or syntax.

**Alternatives**

Other alternatives to pako and fflate include:

1. **zlib**: A widely used compression library for JavaScript.
2. **lz-string**: A lightweight, fast compression library for JavaScript.
3. **brotli**: A modern compression algorithm developed by Google.

Each of these alternatives has its own strengths and weaknesses, and the choice of which one to use depends on specific requirements and performance needs.

compression libraries comparison (version: 0) Benchmark.js

Comparing performance of: `unzip pako a vs unzip pako b vs zip pako a vs zip pako b vs unzip fflate a vs unzip fflate b vs zip fflate a vs zip fflate b`

Created: 5 years ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

unzip pako a

unzip pako b

zip pako a

zip pako b

unzip fflate a

unzip fflate b

zip fflate a

zip fflate b

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 42 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 31 runs

Firefox 5 runs

Mobile 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):

compression libraries comparison (version: 0) Benchmark.js

Comparing performance of: unzip pako a vs unzip pako b vs zip pako a vs zip pako b vs unzip fflate a vs unzip fflate b vs zip fflate a vs zip fflate b

Created: 5 years ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

unzip pako a

unzip pako b

zip pako a

zip pako b

unzip fflate a

unzip fflate b

zip fflate a

zip fflate b

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 42 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 31 runs

Firefox 5 runs

Mobile 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: `unzip pako a vs unzip pako b vs zip pako a vs zip pako b vs unzip fflate a vs unzip fflate b vs zip fflate a vs zip fflate b`