Benchmark: ceil vs bitwise - MeasureThat.net

Script Preparation code:

var x = Math.random() * 100000000;
var y;

Tests:

ceil
y = Math.ceil(x);
pipe
y = (x | 0) + 1;

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
ceil
pipe

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 2 months ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/144.0.0.0 Safari/537.36 Edg/144.0.0.0

Browser/OS: Chrome 144 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
ceil	11051649.0 Ops/sec
pipe	11294747.0 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 MeasureThat.net and understand what's being tested in this benchmark.

**Benchmark Description**

The benchmark is designed to compare two approaches for rounding up an integer value: `Math.ceil()` and bitwise operations (`x | 0`).

**Script Preparation Code**

The script preparation code generates a random integer `x` between 0 and 100 million, which will be used as the input value for both test cases.

**Html Preparation Code**

There is no HTML preparation code provided, which means that only JavaScript code is executed for each benchmark test case.

**Test Cases**

There are two test cases:

1. **ceil**: This test case uses `Math.ceil()` to round up the random integer `x`. The expected output is an integer value rounded up to the nearest whole number.
2. **pipe**: This test case uses a bitwise operation (`x | 0`) followed by adding 1 to round up the input value `x`. The bitwise operation works as follows: it performs a bitwise AND operation with 0, which effectively discards any fractional part of the integer, and then adds 1 to the result.

**Pros and Cons**

* **Math.ceil()**: This approach is straightforward and easy to understand. It's also widely supported by JavaScript engines.
	+ Pros: Easy to implement, widely supported
	+ Cons: May be slower than bitwise operations for very large inputs due to the overhead of function calls
* **Bitwise operations (x | 0 + 1)**: This approach is often faster and more efficient than `Math.ceil()` because it avoids the overhead of function calls.
	+ Pros: Generally faster, more efficient
	+ Cons: Requires bitwise operations, which may not be as easy to understand for some developers

**Other Considerations**

* **Performance**: The benchmark measures the execution speed of each test case. The browser with the fastest execution time for both test cases is considered the winner.
* **Browser Support**: The benchmark uses a specific version of Chrome (109) and Windows 10. Other browsers may not support this benchmark or may have different results due to differences in JavaScript engine implementation.

**Library/Feature Explanation**

There are no external libraries used in this benchmark, but there is an example of using bitwise operations (`x | 0`) to round up a value. This syntax is specific to the language and is not typically used outside of performance-critical code or low-level programming.

**Special JS Feature/Syntax**

The only special feature/syntax mentioned here is the use of bitwise operations (`x | 0`). While this is a valid JavaScript operation, it's not commonly used for rounding up values due to its non-obvious nature.

Related benchmarks:

ceil vs bitwise (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: ceil vs pipe

Created: 4 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

ceil

pipe

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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