Benchmark: array vs Float64Array sort

Script Preparation code:

var a = [...Array(10000)].map(_ => Math.random());
var ta = (new Float64Array(10000)).map(_ => Math.random());

Tests:

array sort
a.sort();
typedArray sort
ta.sort();

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 7 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 7 runs

typedArray sort

28K/s

array sort

1K/s

Fastest: typedArray sort (23.3x faster)

View exact numbers

✓ typedArray sort: 27,716 ops/sec
• array sort: 1,192 ops/sec

Results show median performance across all community submissions. Run this benchmark yourself to verify on your device.

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
array sort
typedArray sort

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 9 months ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/141.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 141 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

typedArray sort

41K/s

array sort

2K/s

View exact numbers

Test name	Executions per second
✓ typedArray sort	40,638 Ops/sec
array sort	1,818 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

**Overview of the Benchmark**

The provided benchmark tests the performance difference between sorting an untyped JavaScript array (`a`) and a typed array (`Float64Array`, `ta`). A typed array is a binary data type that provides more efficient memory management and improved performance compared to an untyped array.

**Comparison Options**

Two options are being compared:

1. **Untyped Array (a) Sort**: The first option compares the performance of sorting an untyped JavaScript array (`a`).
2. **TypedArray Sort (ta)**: The second option compares the performance of sorting a typed array (`Float64Array`, `ta`).

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

* **Untyped Array (a) Sort**:
	+ Pros: Easy to create and manipulate, no special setup required.
	+ Cons: Less efficient than typed arrays due to dynamic memory allocation and type checking.
* **TypedArray Sort (ta)**:
	+ Pros: More efficient due to better memory management, improved performance, and reduced type checking overhead.
	+ Cons: Requires creating a typed array instance before sorting.

**Library Used**

The `Float64Array` is a JavaScript built-in class that represents an array of 64-bit floating-point numbers. Its purpose is to provide more efficient storage and manipulation of large numerical arrays compared to untyped arrays.

**Special JS Feature/Syntax**

There are no special JavaScript features or syntax being used in this benchmark beyond the use of typed arrays.

**Other Alternatives**

Alternative approaches to sorting an array could include:

* Using a library like Lodash or Array.prototype.sort() with options (e.g., `sort()` with `{ unstable: true }` for stability).
* Using a parallel processing framework like Web Workers to sort multiple arrays concurrently.
* Implementing a custom sorting algorithm, such as quicksort or mergesort.

Keep in mind that these alternatives may not directly compare to the typed array approach being tested here.

array vs Float64Array sort (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: `array sort vs typedArray sort`

Created: 4 years ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

array sort

typedArray sort

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 7 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 7 runs

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

array vs Float64Array sort (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: array sort vs typedArray sort

Created: 4 years ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

array sort

typedArray sort

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 7 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 7 runs

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: `array sort vs typedArray sort`