Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
test power
(version: 0)
t
Comparing performance of:
sqr vs pow
Created:
5 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
Tests:
sqr
for (let i = 0; i < 100000; i++) {let x = 111111 ** 2}
pow
for (let i = 0; i < 100000; i++) {let x = Math.pow(111111,2)}
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
sqr
pow
Fastest:
N/A
Slowest:
N/A
Latest run results:
No previous run results
This benchmark does not have any results yet. Be the first one
to run it!
Autogenerated LLM Summary
(model
llama3.2:3b
, generated one year ago):
Let's break down the benchmark being tested on MeasureThat.net. **What is being tested?** The test case measures the performance of two different mathematical operations: squaring numbers (using JavaScript's exponentiation operator `**`) and using the built-in `Math.pow()` function to square a number. The benchmark tests how many times each operation can be performed within one second on a desktop computer running Firefox 86. **Options compared** The test case compares: 1. **Exponentiation with two asterisks (`**`)**: This is a simple and concise way to perform exponentiation in JavaScript. 2. `Math.pow()` function: This is a built-in JavaScript function that performs exponentiation. **Pros and Cons of each approach** **Exponentiation with two asterisks (`**`)** Pros: * Simple and concise syntax * Fast execution (since it's a built-in operator) Cons: * May not be as readable or maintainable for complex calculations * May have subtle performance differences depending on the JavaScript engine used **Math.pow() function** Pros: * More readable and maintainable code (especially for complex calculations) * Can be more predictable and consistent in performance, since it's a built-in function optimized by the JavaScript engine Cons: * May have slightly slower execution compared to the exponentiation operator (`**`) * Requires importing the `Math` object or using `Math.pow()` directly **Other considerations** Both approaches can be suitable for simple calculations like squaring numbers. However, for more complex calculations, using a library like a polynomial evaluation engine or a specialized math library might provide better performance and readability. If you need to perform more advanced mathematical operations or want more control over the calculation process, consider using a library like [MathJS](https://mathjs.org/), which provides a powerful API for mathematical computations in JavaScript. **Special JS feature** No special JavaScript features are used in this benchmark. The syntax is standard JavaScript and uses built-in functions like `Math.pow()`. **Alternatives to MeasureThat.net** MeasureThat.net is a unique platform for measuring JavaScript performance, but there are alternative tools and frameworks available: 1. **JSPerf**: A popular benchmarking tool specifically designed for testing JavaScript performance. 2. **Benchpress.js**: A benchmarking library that provides a simple way to measure the performance of JavaScript code. 3. **Benchmark.js**: Another popular benchmarking library that allows you to write custom benchmarks and compare results across different browsers and environments. These tools can be used to create similar benchmarks or test other aspects of JavaScript performance, such as DOM manipulation, event handling, or async/await execution times.
Related benchmarks:
Math.pow(2,n) vs Table lookup?
testpow123
Power vs Square Root functions
Math.pow vs ** vs * – non-constant
Leetcode Pow vs Math.pow syntax
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?