Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
Magic asda
(version: 0)
Trsut me bro
Comparing performance of:
Not saving and restoring context state vs Saving and restoring
Created:
4 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
HTML Preparation code:
<canvas id="canvas" width="800" height="300"></canvas>
Script Preparation code:
$canvas = document.getElementById('canvas'); $context = $canvas.getContext('2d'); $context.clearRect(0, 0, 800, 300); $iterations = 5000;
Tests:
Not saving and restoring context state
for (let i=0; i<$iterations; ++i) { $context.fillStyle = 'rgba(100,150,200,0.9)'; $context.fillRect(0, 0, 1, 1); }
Saving and restoring
for (let i=0; i<$iterations; ++i) { $context.save(); $context.fillStyle = 'rgba(100,150,200,0.9)'; $context.fillRect(0, 0, 1, 1); $context.restore(); }
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
Not saving and restoring context state
Saving and restoring
Fastest:
N/A
Slowest:
N/A
Latest run results:
No previous run results
This benchmark does not have any results yet. Be the first one
to run it!
Autogenerated LLM Summary
(model
llama3.2:3b
, generated one year ago):
I'll break down the provided benchmark definition, test cases, and results to explain what's being tested. **Benchmark Definition** The provided JSON represents a JavaScript microbenchmark on the MeasureThat.net website. The benchmark is designed to compare two approaches: 1. **Not saving and restoring context state**: This option tests the performance of rendering a single pixel (with color `rgba(100,150,200,0.9)`) repeatedly without using the `save()` and `restore()` methods to preserve the context's drawing state. 2. **Saving and restoring**: This option tests the performance of rendering a single pixel repeatedly while using the `save()` and `restore()` methods to save the current drawing state and then restore it before each pixel is drawn. **Options Compared** The two options are compared in terms of their performance, measured by the number of executions per second (ExecutionsPerSecond). The benchmark aims to identify which approach yields better performance. **Pros and Cons** * **Not saving and restoring context state**: + Pros: simpler code, potentially fewer function calls and overhead. + Cons: may lead to reduced performance due to context restoration, which can be expensive in terms of CPU cycles. * **Saving and restoring**: + Pros: can improve performance by reducing the number of context restorations needed. + Cons: adds complexity to the code with more function calls and potentially increased overhead. **Library and Purpose** The `Canvas` API is used in this benchmark. The Canvas element provides a rendering context that allows developers to draw graphics programmatically. In this case, the library is being used to render a single pixel (with color `rgba(100,150,200,0.9)`) repeatedly. **Special JS Feature or Syntax** The `save()` and `restore()` methods are used in the "Saving and restoring" option to preserve the context's drawing state. These methods are part of the 2D drawing API in JavaScript and allow developers to save and restore the current drawing state, which can be useful when working with complex graphics. **Other Alternatives** If you're interested in exploring alternative approaches or optimizing this benchmark, consider the following: * Using WebGL instead of Canvas for rendering. * Optimizing the pixel rendering code by reducing the number of function calls or using more efficient drawing methods. * Profiling the benchmark using tools like Chrome DevTools or Firefox Developer Edition to identify performance bottlenecks. Keep in mind that the specific approach will depend on your goals, target audience, and the requirements of your project.
Related benchmarks:
rgb vs rgba (1 & 0.5) vs hex canvas
RGB vs RGBa vs HSL vs Hex using Canvas v2
Canvas clearing performance v3
Test save/restore
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?