Benchmark: Number.toLocaleString vs Intl.NumberFormat5

Tests:

Intl.NumberFormat
const currencyPlayNumber = 1; const formatter = new Intl.NumberFormat(undefined, { style: 'currency', currency: 'RUB', }); for(var i = 0; i < 100; i++) { let formatted = formatter.format(currencyPlayNumber); }
Number.toLocaleString
const currencyPlayNumber = 1; for(var i = 0; i < 100; i++) { let formatted = currencyPlayNumber.toLocaleString(undefined, { style: 'currency', currency: 'RUB', }) }

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Intl.NumberFormat
Number.toLocaleString

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):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

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

**Overview**

The benchmark compares two approaches to formatting numbers as currencies: `Intl.NumberFormat` (International Number Format) and `Number.toLocaleString`. The goal is to determine which approach performs better in terms of execution speed.

**What are we testing?**

We have two test cases:

1. **Intl.NumberFormat**: This test creates an instance of the `Intl.NumberFormat` class, passing an undefined locale (which means it will default to the system's default locale) and options for the currency style and code.
2. **Number.toLocaleString**: This test uses the `toLocaleString()` method on a number literal (`1`) with options for the currency style and code.

**Options being compared**

The two approaches differ in how they format numbers as currencies:

* **Intl.NumberFormat**:
	+ Uses the Intl API, which is part of the ECMAScript Internationalization API.
	+ Provides more customization options, such as locale, currency, and numbering system.
	+ Returns a formatted string with the number followed by the currency symbol (e.g., "1 RUB").
* **Number.toLocaleString**:
	+ Uses the `toLocaleString()` method, which is part of the JavaScript language features.
	+ Provides limited customization options for formatting numbers as currencies.
	+ Returns a formatted string with the number followed by the currency symbol (e.g., "1  RUB").

**Pros and Cons**

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

* **Intl.NumberFormat**:
	+ Pros: More customization options, more flexible, can handle multiple currencies and locales.
	+ Cons: Can be slower due to its complexity, may require additional setup (e.g., locale data).
* **Number.toLocaleString**:
	+ Pros: Faster execution speed, simpler implementation, fewer dependencies.
	+ Cons: Limited customization options, only supports a few currency formats.

**Library and purpose**

The `Intl.NumberFormat` class is part of the ECMAScript Internationalization API. Its primary purpose is to provide a way to format numbers as currencies in a locale-dependent manner.

**Special JavaScript feature or syntax**

There's no specific special feature or syntax used in this benchmark. Both approaches are standard JavaScript features.

**Other alternatives**

If you need more advanced formatting options, you might consider using other libraries or APIs, such as:

* **Moment.js**: A popular date and time library that provides a wide range of formatting options.
* **Full-Internationalization-API**: A comprehensive API for handling internationalization tasks in JavaScript, including formatting numbers as currencies.

However, for simple use cases like this benchmark, the `Intl.NumberFormat` and `Number.toLocaleString` approaches are likely sufficient.

Related benchmarks:

Number.toLocaleString vs Intl.NumberFormat5 (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Intl.NumberFormat vs Number.toLocaleString

Created: 4 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Intl.NumberFormat

Number.toLocaleString

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

No previous run results

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