Benchmark: Math.cbrt() vs. Binary search cbrt

Script Preparation code:

function cbrt(x) {
  if (x < 0.0)
    return NaN;
  if (x < 1.0)
    return 1.0 / cbrt(1.0 / x);
  let xhi = x;
  let xlo = 0.0;
  let guess = x / 2.0;
  let next;
  while ((guess * guess * guess) != x) {
    if ((guess * guess * guess) > x)
      xhi = guess;
    else xlo = guess;
    if ((next = (xhi + xlo) / 2.0) == guess)
      break;
    guess = next;
  }
  return guess;
}

Tests:

Math.cbrt()
Math.cbrt(Math.random() * 1000000);
Binary search cbrt
cbrt(Math.random() * 1000000);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Math.cbrt()
Binary search cbrt

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):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's dive into the benchmark.

**What is being tested?**

The provided JSON represents two JavaScript microbenchmarks: `Math.cbrt()` and `cbrt(Math.random() * 1000000)`. The first one tests the built-in `Math.cbrt()` function, which calculates the cube root of a number. The second benchmark tests an implementation of the same functionality using binary search.

**Options compared**

The two benchmarks compare the performance of:

1. **Built-in `Math.cbrt()` function**: This is the standard mathematical function provided by JavaScript's Math library.
2. **Custom implementation using binary search**: This implementation uses a binary search algorithm to find the cube root of a number, which is then returned as a result.

**Pros and cons**

Here are some pros and cons of each approach:

* **Built-in `Math.cbrt()` function**:
	+ Pros: Fast, efficient, and widely supported.
	+ Cons: May not be optimized for specific use cases or performance-critical applications.
* **Custom implementation using binary search**:
	+ Pros: Can be optimized for specific use cases or performance-critical applications. Provides insight into the underlying algorithm's complexity.
	+ Cons: May be slower than the built-in function due to the overhead of implementing and executing the binary search algorithm.

**Library used**

In this benchmark, the library used is JavaScript itself, specifically the Math library. The `Math.cbrt()` function is part of this library.

**Special JS feature or syntax**

This benchmark does not use any special JavaScript features or syntax beyond what's standard in JavaScript. It only uses built-in functions and operators.

**Other alternatives**

If you were to implement a different approach, some alternatives could include:

* Using a more efficient algorithm for calculating cube roots (e.g., Newton's method).
* Utilizing SIMD instructions (Single Instruction, Multiple Data) to perform calculations on multiple values simultaneously.
* Optimizing the binary search implementation for specific use cases (e.g., using a more efficient search strategy or caching results).

Keep in mind that the specific alternatives will depend on your goals and requirements for the benchmark.

Related benchmarks:

Math.cbrt() vs. Binary search cbrt (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Math.cbrt() vs Binary search cbrt

Created: 4 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Math.cbrt()

Binary search cbrt

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

No previous run results

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