Toggle navigation
MeasureThat
.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
is find faster than forEach?
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
forEach vs find
Created:
4 years ago
by:
Guest
Go to the latest result
Script Preparation code:
var arr = Array(10000).map((_, i)=>i);
Tests:
forEach
arr.forEach(()=>null)
find
arr.find((item)=> item === 100)
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
forEach
find
Fastest:
N/A
Slowest:
N/A
Latest run results:
Run details:
(Test run date:
one year ago
)
User agent:
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/133.0.0.0 Safari/537.36
Browser/OS:
Chrome 133 on Windows
View result in a separate tab
Embed
Embed Benchmark Result
<iframe src="https://measurethat.net/Embed?id=586386" width="100%" height="500px"></iframe>
forEach
118K/s
find
50K/s
View exact numbers
Test name
Executions per second
✓
forEach
117,639 Ops/sec
find
50,418 Ops/sec
Autogenerated LLM Summary
(model
llama3.2:3b
, generated one year ago):
Let's break down the benchmark and its components. **Benchmark Definition** The benchmark is designed to compare the performance of two JavaScript methods: `forEach` and `find`. The goal is to determine which method is faster for finding an item in an array. **Script Preparation Code** The script preparation code creates an array with 10,000 elements using the `Array.prototype.map()` method. Each element is assigned a value equal to its index in the array (i.e., `arr[i] = i`). This code sets up a consistent data structure for both methods being compared. **Html Preparation Code** There is no HTML preparation code, which means that this benchmark is focused solely on the JavaScript engine's performance and does not take into account any HTML-related overhead. **Individual Test Cases** We have two test cases: 1. `arr.forEach(() => null)`: This method calls the callback function for each element in the array without returning anything. 2. `arr.find((item) => item === 100)`: This method returns the first element in the array that satisfies the condition (i.e., `item === 100`). **Library Usage** In this benchmark, there is no explicit library usage, but it's worth noting that `Array.prototype.map()` and `Array.prototype.find()` are both part of the ECMAScript standard. **Special JavaScript Feature/Syntax** There are no special JavaScript features or syntaxes being tested in this benchmark. The focus is on comparing the performance of two built-in methods. **Pros and Cons of Different Approaches** The choice between `forEach` and `find` depends on your specific use case: * `forEach`: This method is useful when you need to perform some action for each element in an array without modifying the original array. However, it can be slower than `find` because it has to iterate over the entire array. * `find`: This method returns the first element that satisfies a given condition and stops iterating as soon as found. It's often faster than `forEach` but may return `undefined` if no element matches. **Considerations** When choosing between `forEach` and `find`, consider the following: * If you need to perform some action for each element without modifying the original array, use `forEach`. * If you need to find a specific element that satisfies a condition and stop iterating, use `find`. **Other Alternatives** Some alternative approaches to compare elements in an array include: * Using `for` loops: This can be more explicit but slower than using built-in methods. * Using libraries like Lodash or Ramda: These libraries provide additional functionality for working with arrays, but may add overhead due to the library itself. Keep in mind that performance differences between these approaches will vary depending on the specific use case and implementation.
Related benchmarks
Array.forEach vs Object.keys().forEach
Array loop vs foreach vs map fixed by bomi
Array fill map, vs for i loop
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?