Benchmark: Ramda (/w transducer) vs. Lodash

Ramda (/w transducer) vs. Lodash (version: 0)

Compares performance on the same task using Lodash vs two styles of Ramda vs two styles of "native" Javascript. In all cases the task is pulling "counter" property from each item in an array, filtering out odd items, squaring them, then returning those squared values that have less than two digits.

Comparing performance of: `Lodash vs Ramda with transducer vs Ramda with currying and composition vs Ramda without relying on currying or composition`

Created: 4 years ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

HTML Preparation code:

<script src="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/ramda/0.28.0/ramda.min.js"></script>
<script src="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/lodash.js/4.17.15/lodash.min.js"></script>

Script Preparation code:

var data = _.range(10000).map(function(i) {
  return {
    counter: i
  }
});

function isOdd(num) {
  return num % 2 === 1;
}

function square(num) {
  return num * num;
}

function lessThanThreeDigits(num) {
  return num.toString().length < 3;
}

Tests:

Lodash
var result = _.chain(data) .pick('counter') .filter(isOdd) .map(square) .filter(lessThanThreeDigits) .value();
Ramda with transducer
var transducer = R.compose ( R.map(R.prop('counter')), R.filter(isOdd), R.map(square), R.filter(lessThanThreeDigits), ); var result = R.transduce ( transducer, (acc, val) => { acc.push(val); return acc; }, [], data, );
Ramda with currying and composition
var result = R.pipe( R.pluck('counter'), R.filter(isOdd), R.map(square), R.filter(lessThanThreeDigits) )(data);
Ramda without relying on currying or composition
var result = R.filter(lessThanThreeDigits, R.map(square, R.filter(isOdd, R.pluck('counter', data))));

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 16 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 11 runs

Lodash

1.1M/s

Ramda without relying on currying or composition

2K/s

Ramda with currying and composition

2K/s

Ramda with transducer

2K/s

Fastest: Lodash (506.3x faster)

View exact numbers

✓ Lodash: 1,055,501 ops/sec
• Ramda without relying on currying or composition: 2,170 ops/sec
• Ramda with currying and composition: 2,167 ops/sec
• Ramda with transducer: 2,085 ops/sec

Firefox 5 runs

Lodash

394K/s

Ramda without relying on currying or composition

550/s

Ramda with currying and composition

509/s

Ramda with transducer

492/s

Fastest: Lodash (800.2x faster)

View exact numbers

✓ Lodash: 393,689 ops/sec
• Ramda without relying on currying or composition: 550 ops/sec
• Ramda with currying and composition: 509 ops/sec
• Ramda with transducer: 492 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
Lodash
Ramda with transducer
Ramda with currying and composition
Ramda without relying on currying or composition

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: one year ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; Android 10; K) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/138.0.0.0 Mobile Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome Mobile 138 on Android

View result in a separate tab

Lodash

116K/s

Ramda with currying and composition

315/s

Ramda without relying on currying or composition

309/s

Ramda with transducer

272/s

View exact numbers

Test name	Executions per second
✓ Lodash	116,158 Ops/sec
Ramda with currying and composition	315 Ops/sec
Ramda without relying on currying or composition	309 Ops/sec
Ramda with transducer	272 Ops/sec

Ramda (/w transducer) vs. Lodash (version: 0)

Compares performance on the same task using Lodash vs two styles of Ramda vs two styles of "native" Javascript. In all cases the task is pulling "counter" property from each item in an array, filtering out odd items, squaring them, then returning those squared values that have less than two digits.

Comparing performance of: Lodash vs Ramda with transducer vs Ramda with currying and composition vs Ramda without relying on currying or composition

Created: 4 years ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

Lodash

Ramda with transducer

Ramda with currying and composition

Ramda without relying on currying or composition

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 16 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 11 runs

Firefox 5 runs

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Related benchmarks

Comparing performance of: `Lodash vs Ramda with transducer vs Ramda with currying and composition vs Ramda without relying on currying or composition`