Benchmark: Javascript number with and without exponent (e)

Tests:

Without exponent
Math.random() + 0.00000000019402553646857487 + 0.00000000019402553646857487
With exponent
Math.random() + 1.9402553646857487e-10 + 1.9402553646857487e-10
With calculation
Math.random() + (1/2147483647 * 2.5/6) + (1/2147483647 * 2.5/6)

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Without exponent
With exponent
With calculation

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/130.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 130 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

With exponent

12.0M/s

Without exponent

12.0M/s

With calculation

11.4M/s

View exact numbers

Test name	Executions per second
✓ With exponent	12,048,140 Ops/sec
Without exponent	11,954,781 Ops/sec
With calculation	11,422,997 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 and explore what's being tested on MeasureThat.net.

**Benchmark Definition JSON**

The provided Benchmark Definition JSON represents a simple benchmark that tests various aspects of JavaScript's mathematical operations, specifically floating-point arithmetic. The `Script Preparation Code` and `Html Preparation Code` fields are empty, indicating that no custom code is needed to prepare the test environment.

**Options Compared**

Three options are being compared:

1. **Without Exponent**: This test case measures the performance of adding two small floating-point numbers without using exponents.
2. **With Exponent**: This test case measures the performance of adding two small floating-point numbers with an exponent (e.g., `1.9402553646857487e-10`).
3. **With Calculation**: This test case measures the performance of performing a calculation involving division and multiplication, which may not be directly related to simple arithmetic operations.

**Pros and Cons**

Here's a brief analysis of each approach:

* **Without Exponent**: Simple and straightforward, this test case is likely used to evaluate the baseline performance of JavaScript's floating-point addition. Pros: easy to understand, minimal overhead. Cons: might not accurately represent real-world usage.
* **With Exponent**: Using exponents can introduce additional complexity, but it may also better reflect how numerical operations are typically performed in real-world applications. Pros: more relevant to practical use cases. Cons: requires careful consideration of precision and rounding issues.
* **With Calculation**: This test case introduces an additional layer of complexity with the calculation involving division and multiplication. While it might be useful for evaluating specific performance characteristics, it may not be as representative of general arithmetic operations.

**Library Usage**

None of the individual test cases explicitly use a JavaScript library, but the `Math.random()` function is used in each test case. `Math.random()` generates a random number between 0 (inclusive) and 1 (exclusive). While not a traditional library, it's an essential built-in function that every JavaScript developer should be familiar with.

**Special JS Features or Syntax**

There are no special JavaScript features or syntax mentioned in the Benchmark Definition JSON. The test cases only use basic arithmetic operations and the `Math.random()` function.

**Other Alternatives**

If you were to create a new benchmark, you might consider adding additional test cases that cover other aspects of JavaScript's mathematical capabilities, such as:

* Comparing performance with different data types (e.g., integers, complex numbers)
* Evaluating the impact of rounding modes or precision settings on arithmetic operations
* Incorporating more realistic scenarios, like working with large numbers or performing scientific calculations

Keep in mind that each new test case should be designed to provide meaningful insights into specific aspects of JavaScript's performance and behavior.

I hope this explanation helps you understand the Benchmark Definition JSON and its implications!

Javascript number with and without exponent (e) (version: 2) Benchmark.js

Comparing performance of: `Without exponent vs With exponent vs With calculation`

Created: 9 years ago by: Registered User

Go to the latest result

Without exponent

With exponent

With calculation

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

Javascript number with and without exponent (e) (version: 2) Benchmark.js

Comparing performance of: Without exponent vs With exponent vs With calculation

Created: 9 years ago by: Registered User

Go to the latest result

Without exponent

With exponent

With calculation

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: `Without exponent vs With exponent vs With calculation`