Benchmark: eval vs parseInt vs Number vs JSON.parse

Tests:

long eval()
eval("99999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999");
long parseInt()
parseInt("99999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999");
short eval()
eval("999");
short parseInt()
parseInt("999");
short Number class call
Number('999');
long Number class call
Number('99999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999');
short JSON.parse
JSON.parse('999');
long JSON.parse
JSON.parse('99999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999');

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 13 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 13 runs

short Number class call

11.9M/s

long Number class call

11.7M/s

short parseInt()

11.5M/s

short JSON.parse

7.2M/s

long parseInt()

5.7M/s

long eval()

5.7M/s

short eval()

5.6M/s

long JSON.parse

3.6M/s

Fastest: short Number class call (3.3x faster)

View exact numbers

✓ short Number class call: 11,856,379 ops/sec
• long Number class call: 11,726,817 ops/sec
• short parseInt(): 11,536,102 ops/sec
• short JSON.parse: 7,175,201 ops/sec
• long parseInt(): 5,732,454 ops/sec
• long eval(): 5,722,224 ops/sec
• short eval(): 5,637,142 ops/sec
• long JSON.parse: 3,607,869 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
long eval()
long parseInt()
short eval()
short parseInt()
short Number class call
long Number class call
short JSON.parse
long JSON.parse

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/140.0.0.0 Safari/537.36 Edg/140.0.0.0

Browser/OS: Chrome 140 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

short parseInt()

170.1M/s

long Number class call

163.2M/s

short Number class call

153.4M/s

short JSON.parse

40.1M/s

short eval()

25.2M/s

long eval()

24.7M/s

long parseInt()

13.4M/s

long JSON.parse

8.1M/s

View exact numbers

Test name	Executions per second
✓ short parseInt()	170,074,480 Ops/sec
long Number class call	163,232,432 Ops/sec
short Number class call	153,391,696 Ops/sec
short JSON.parse	40,129,780 Ops/sec
short eval()	25,178,994 Ops/sec
long eval()	24,657,034 Ops/sec
long parseInt()	13,441,430 Ops/sec
long JSON.parse	8,119,364 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's dive into the world of JavaScript microbenchmarks.

**What is being tested?**

The benchmark measures the performance of three different ways to parse or convert numbers:

1. `eval()`: executes a string as JavaScript code.
2. `parseInt()`: converts a string to an integer value.
3. `Number()`: creates a new number object from a string.
4. `JSON.parse()`: parses a JSON string into a JavaScript object.

These functions are used to parse or convert numbers, which can be useful in various scenarios such as handling user input, processing data from APIs, or validating user-generated content.

**Comparison of options**

The benchmark compares the performance of these four options for different types and lengths of input:

* Short `eval()` (single-digit number)
* Long `eval()` (long string representation of a large number)
* Short `parseInt()`
* Long `parseInt()`
* Short `Number` class call
* Long `Number` class call
* Short `JSON.parse()`
* Long `JSON.parse()`

**Pros and Cons**

Here's a brief summary of the pros and cons for each option:

1. **eval()**:
	* Pros: Can parse complex expressions, flexible.
	* Cons: Evaluates arbitrary JavaScript code, security risks if not sanitized.
2. **parseInt()**:
	* Pros: Fast, efficient, and secure (if used correctly).
	* Cons: Limited to parsing integers only, can be brittle.
3. **Number()**:
	+ Pros: Creates a new number object, more flexible than `parseInt()`.
	+ Cons: Can create unnecessary objects in memory.
4. **JSON.parse()**:
	+ Pros: Fast and efficient for parsing JSON data.
	+ Cons: Limited to parsing JSON strings only.

**Library usage**

In this benchmark, no specific libraries are used except for the built-in JavaScript functions mentioned above.

**Special JS features or syntax**

There are no special JavaScript features or syntax being tested in this benchmark. The focus is on comparing the performance of different parsing and conversion methods.

Now that we've covered the basics, let's talk about alternative approaches:

Other alternatives to these four options include:

* Using a dedicated library like `lodash` for parsing numbers, which can provide additional functionality and flexibility.
* Employing string manipulation techniques, such as regular expressions or substring extraction, to extract relevant parts of input strings.
* Utilizing native support for scientific notation or hexadecimal representations in JavaScript (e.g., `Number('0x...')`) if applicable.

However, these alternatives are not part of this specific benchmark and would require additional code changes to accommodate.

eval vs parseInt vs Number vs JSON.parse (version: 0) Benchmark.js

Comparing performance of: `long eval() vs long parseInt() vs short eval() vs short parseInt() vs short Number class call vs long Number class call vs short JSON.parse vs long JSON.parse`

Created: 5 years ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

long eval()

long parseInt()

short eval()

short parseInt()

short Number class call

long Number class call

short JSON.parse

long JSON.parse

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 13 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 13 runs

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

eval vs parseInt vs Number vs JSON.parse (version: 0) Benchmark.js

Comparing performance of: long eval() vs long parseInt() vs short eval() vs short parseInt() vs short Number class call vs long Number class call vs short JSON.parse vs long JSON.parse

Created: 5 years ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

long eval()

long parseInt()

short eval()

short parseInt()

short Number class call

long Number class call

short JSON.parse

long JSON.parse

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 13 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 13 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: `long eval() vs long parseInt() vs short eval() vs short parseInt() vs short Number class call vs long Number class call vs short JSON.parse vs long JSON.parse`