Toggle navigation
MeasureThat
.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
Math.random vs crypto.getRandom Alberto
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
Math.random() vs crypto.getRandomValues()
Created:
4 years ago
by:
Guest
Go to the latest result
Tests:
Math.random()
Math.floor(Math.random() * 4294967296);
crypto.getRandomValues()
crypto.getRandomValues(new Uint32Array(1))[0]
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
Math.random()
crypto.getRandomValues()
Fastest:
N/A
Slowest:
N/A
Latest run results:
Run details:
(Test run date:
one year ago
)
User agent:
Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 18_2 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/605.1.15 (KHTML, like Gecko) FxiOS/133.0 Mobile/15E148 Safari/605.1.15
Browser/OS:
Mobile Safari 18 on iOS 18.2
View result in a separate tab
Embed
Embed Benchmark Result
<iframe src="https://measurethat.net/Embed?id=575146" width="100%" height="500px"></iframe>
Math.random()
326.5M/s
crypto.getRandomValues()
3.7M/s
View exact numbers
Test name
Executions per second
✓
Math.random()
326,548,352 Ops/sec
crypto.getRandomValues()
3,739,616 Ops/sec
Autogenerated LLM Summary
(model
llama3.2:3b
, generated one year ago):
Let's dive into the world of JavaScript microbenchmarks. **What is being tested?** The provided JSON benchmark defines two individual test cases: 1. `Math.random()`: This test case measures the performance of the built-in `Math.random()` function, which generates a random number between 0 (inclusive) and 1 (exclusive). 2. `crypto.getRandomValues()`: This test case measures the performance of the `crypto.getRandomValues()` function, which generates cryptographically secure random numbers. **Options compared** The two options being compared are: * **Math.random()**: A built-in JavaScript function that uses a pseudo-random number generator to generate random numbers. * **crypto.getRandomValues()**: A Web Cryptography API (W3C) function that generates cryptographically secure random numbers. **Pros and cons of each approach:** 1. **Math.random():** * Pros: + Easy to implement and understand. + Works on most browsers and platforms. * Cons: + Pseudo-random, which means it's not suitable for applications that require true randomness (e.g., cryptographic purposes). + May generate predictable patterns or sequences if used in a loop with the same seed value. 2. **crypto.getRandomValues():** * Pros: + Generates truly random numbers, making it suitable for cryptographic purposes. + Provides better entropy and randomness compared to `Math.random()`. * Cons: + Requires support for Web Cryptography API (W3C) in browsers or platforms. + May be slower than `Math.random()` due to the additional cryptographic overhead. **Other considerations:** * **Libraries:** In the provided benchmark, neither test case uses a specific library. However, if a test case were to use a library like `Cryptico` or `random-js`, it would provide an alternative implementation of `crypto.getRandomValues()`. * **Special JS features or syntax:** Neither test case uses any special JavaScript features or syntax beyond the built-in functions and APIs. * **Alternatives:** + For non-cryptographic purposes, other alternatives to `Math.random()` might include: - `Number.seedrandom()`: A library function that generates random numbers using a seed value. - `randint():` A function from libraries like `crypto-js` or `seedrandom`. + For cryptographic purposes, alternative implementations of `crypto.getRandomValues()` might include: - `window.crypto.getRandomValues()`: Another W3C API for generating cryptographically secure random numbers. - `Math.random()` with a different seed value (not recommended due to predictability concerns). In summary, the provided benchmark compares the performance of two JavaScript functions: `Math.random()` and `crypto.getRandomValues()`. While `Math.random()` is easy to implement and suitable for non-cryptographic purposes, `crypto.getRandomValues()` provides better randomness and entropy, making it a more suitable choice for cryptographic applications.
Related benchmarks
repeated Math.random() vs crypto.getRandomValues()
crypto.getRandomValues vs Math.random()
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?