Benchmark: Math.floor Vs parseInt Vs parseInt

Tests:

parseInt-10
console.log('myclientid_' + parseInt('' + Math.random() * 100, 10))
Math.floor
console.log('myclientid_' + Math.floor(Math.random() * 100))
parseInt
console.log('myclientid_' + parseInt('' + Math.random() * 100))

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
parseInt-10
Math.floor
parseInt

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 2 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) QtWebEngine/6.6.2 Chrome/112.0.5615.213 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 112 on Linux

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
parseInt-10	159149.3 Ops/sec
Math.floor	176960.9 Ops/sec
parseInt	151838.6 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the provided benchmark definition and test cases.

**Benchmark Definition**

The provided JSON represents a JavaScript microbenchmarking framework called MeasureThat.net. It defines a benchmark with three test cases:

1. `parseInt-10`: This test case creates a random number between 0 and 100, converts it to an integer using `parseInt`, and logs the result to the console.
2. `Math.floor`: This test case generates a random number between 0 and 100, uses the `Math.floor` function to convert it to an integer, and logs the result to the console.
3. `parseInt`: This test case is similar to `parseInt-10`, but without the conversion from string to number.

**Options Compared**

The benchmark compares three options:

1. `parseInt`: Uses the `parseInt` function to convert a string to an integer. The second argument (10) specifies the radix (base) of the conversion.
2. `Math.floor`: Uses the built-in `Math.floor` function to round down a number to the nearest integer.

**Pros and Cons**

Here are some pros and cons for each option:

1. `parseInt`:
	* Pros: Can be more efficient when converting strings with a specific radix, such as hexadecimal or binary.
	* Cons: May lead to unexpected results if not used correctly (e.g., omitting the radix argument).
2. `Math.floor`:
	* Pros: Built-in function, easy to use, and reliable.
	* Cons: May be slower than using `parseInt` with a specific radix.

**Library Usage**

None of the test cases use any external libraries.

**Special JS Feature or Syntax**

The benchmark uses the following special JavaScript features:

1. `console.log`: Used to log the results to the console.
2. String concatenation (`'' + ...`): Used to concatenate strings in the test cases.

**Other Alternatives**

In a real-world scenario, you might consider alternative approaches, such as:

* Using a library like `numjs` or `decimal.js` for more precise arithmetic operations.
* Implementing custom integer conversion functions using bitwise operations or other techniques.
* Using a just-in-time (JIT) compiler to optimize the benchmarked code.

However, for simple use cases like this benchmark, the built-in `Math.floor` and `parseInt` functions are likely sufficient.

Related benchmarks:

Math.floor Vs parseInt Vs parseInt (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: parseInt-10 vs Math.floor vs parseInt

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

parseInt-10

Math.floor

parseInt

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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