Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
Date.now() vs +new Date() vs new Date().getTime();
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
Date.now() vs +new Date(); vs timestamp = new Date().getTime();
Created:
3 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
Script Preparation code:
var timestamp = null;
Tests:
Date.now()
timestamp = Date.now();
+new Date();
timestamp = +new Date()
timestamp = new Date().getTime();
timestamp = new Date().getTime();
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (3)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
Date.now()
+new Date();
timestamp = new Date().getTime();
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 explain what's tested on the provided JSON, describe the pros and cons of different approaches, and provide additional context. **What's being tested?** The benchmark measures the performance of three different ways to get the current timestamp in JavaScript: 1. `Date.now()` 2. `+new Date()` (note: this is a shorthand way of creating a new date object and then using the `getTime()` method, but it's equivalent to calling `new Date().getTime()` or simply `Date.now()`) 3. `new Date().getTime();` **Approach 1: Using `Date.now()`** This approach creates a single, global variable `timestamp` that is set to the current timestamp using `Date.now()`. This approach is simple and straightforward. Pros: * Easy to implement * Fast execution Cons: * Creates a global variable that can be shared between tests, which may affect other parts of the benchmark * May not be suitable for testing specific functionality that relies on the original value of `timestamp` **Approach 2: Using `+new Date()` or `new Date().getTime()`** These approaches create a new date object and then use its `getTime()` method to get the current timestamp. This approach is slightly more complex than using `Date.now()`, but it allows for more control over the original value of the timestamp. Pros: * Allows for more control over the original value of the timestamp * Can be useful for testing specific functionality that relies on the original value Cons: * More complex implementation compared to `Date.now()` * May have slightly slower execution due to the overhead of creating a new date object **Other considerations** The benchmark also includes additional metadata, such as browser and device information, which can help provide context about the results. **Library and special JS feature** There is no explicit library used in this benchmark. However, `Date` is a built-in JavaScript object that provides various methods for working with dates and times. **Special JS features (not explicitly mentioned)** While not explicitly mentioned, using `Date.now()` or `new Date().getTime()` can take advantage of modern browser support for high-resolution timestamps, which can provide more accurate results.
Related benchmarks:
Date.now() vs new Date().getTime()
new Date().getTime() vs Date.now()
Date.now() vs new Date()
Date.now() vs new Date().getTime(qu)
Date.now() - Date.now() vs new Date() - new Date()
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?