Benchmark: math pow vs multiply

Tests:

pow
var x = Math.pow(54,2);
mult
var y = 54*54

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 148 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 116 runs

mult

170.3M/s

pow

15.8M/s

Fastest: mult (10.8x faster)

View exact numbers

✓ mult: 170,349,952 ops/sec
• pow: 15,845,914 ops/sec

Firefox 21 runs

mult

1459.7M/s

pow

1453.9M/s

View exact numbers

✓ mult: 1,459,710,464 ops/sec
• pow: 1,453,919,488 ops/sec

Safari 5 runs

mult

379.9M/s

pow

315.2M/s

Fastest: mult (1.2x faster)

View exact numbers

✓ mult: 379,904,480 ops/sec
• pow: 315,166,304 ops/sec

Mobile Results:

Chrome 6 runs

mult

127.1M/s

pow

6.0M/s

Fastest: mult (21.0x faster)

View exact numbers

✓ mult: 127,064,528 ops/sec
• pow: 6,040,129 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
pow
mult

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/137.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 137 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

pow

207.3M/s

mult

195.3M/s

View exact numbers

Test name	Executions per second
✓ pow	207,285,168 Ops/sec
mult	195,292,576 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

I'll break down the benchmark and its test cases to help explain what's being tested.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark, named "math pow vs multiply," compares the performance of two mathematical operations: exponentiation using `Math.pow()` versus multiplication (`*`).

**Options Compared**

There are two main options being compared:

1. **Exponentiation with `Math.pow()`**: This method raises a number to a given power.
2. **Multiplication**: This is a straightforward operation where the first operand is multiplied by itself.

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

* **`Math.pow()`**:
	+ Pros: It provides an elegant way to perform exponentiation and can be more readable than multiplying numbers together for larger exponents.
	+ Cons: For small exponents, multiplication may be faster due to the overhead of function calls.
* **Multiplication**:
	+ Pros: It's a simple, low-overhead operation that can be faster for smaller exponents.
	+ Cons: The code can become harder to read and maintain when dealing with larger exponents.

**Library Used**

There is no specific library used in this benchmark. However, the `Math` object is part of the JavaScript standard library and provides various mathematical functions, including `pow()`.

**Special JS Features/Syntax**

This benchmark does not use any special JavaScript features or syntax that's not widely supported across browsers.

**Other Considerations**

When dealing with exponentiation, it's essential to consider the following factors:

* For larger exponents, multiplication can be faster due to the overhead of function calls in `Math.pow()`.
* However, for very large exponents, `Math.pow()` may be faster due to the use of optimized algorithms and caching.
* The choice between `Math.pow()` and multiplication ultimately depends on the specific use case and performance requirements.

**Alternatives**

If you want to measure the performance of exponentiation in JavaScript, you can consider using other methods, such as:

1. **Binary exponentiation**: This method uses a divide-and-conquer approach to calculate large exponents more efficiently.
2. **Fastest Common Subexpression Problem (FCSP)**: This method avoids redundant calculations by storing intermediate results.

However, these alternatives may not be suitable for this specific benchmark, which aims to compare `Math.pow()` and multiplication directly.

**Benchmark Preparation Code**

The provided code defines the benchmark's script preparation code as empty (`null`). This means that no additional setup or initialization is required before running the benchmark.

math pow vs multiply (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: `pow vs mult`

Created: 9 years ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

pow

mult

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 148 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 116 runs

Firefox 21 runs

Safari 5 runs

Mobile Results:

Chrome 6 runs

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

math pow vs multiply (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: pow vs mult

Created: 9 years ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

pow

mult

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 148 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 116 runs

Firefox 21 runs

Safari 5 runs

Mobile Results:

Chrome 6 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: `pow vs mult`