Toggle navigation
MeasureThat
.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
ceil vs bitwise
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
ceil vs pipe
Created:
4 years ago
by:
Guest
Go to the latest result
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>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
ceil
pipe
Fastest:
N/A
Slowest:
N/A
Latest run results:
Run details:
(Test run date:
5 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
Embed
Embed Benchmark Result
<iframe src="https://measurethat.net/Embed?id=625122" width="100%" height="500px"></iframe>
pipe
11.3M/s
ceil
11.1M/s
View exact numbers
Test name
Executions per second
✓
pipe
11,294,747 Ops/sec
ceil
11,051,649 Ops/sec
Autogenerated LLM Summary
(model
llama3.2:3b
, generated one year ago):
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
Math.floor vs bitwise <<
floor() vs trunc() vs bitwise hacks (~~, >> 0, etc) 2
Bitwise vs modulo (2)
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?