Benchmark: Int32Array.sort vs Array.sort

Script Preparation code:

nums = [];
let i = 10 ** 3;
while (--i > 0) nums.push(i);

Tests:

Int32Array.sort
new Int32Array(nums).sort();
Array.sort
nums.sort((a, b) => a - b);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Int32Array.sort
Array.sort

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/118.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 118 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Int32Array.sort	426208.1 Ops/sec
Array.sort	112644.1 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 and its results.

**What is being tested?**

The test case compares two approaches to sort an array of 10,000 integers: using the `Int32Array` constructor and calling its `sort()` method, versus using the native `Array` class and its `sort()` method with a compare function.

**Options compared**

The two options are:

1. **Int32Array.sort()**: This approach uses the `Int32Array` constructor to create an array of 32-bit integers, which is then sorted in-place using the `sort()` method.
2. **Array.sort()**: This approach uses the native `Array` class and its `sort()` method with a compare function that subtracts two values.

**Pros and cons**

Here's a brief overview of each approach:

1. **Int32Array.sort()**:
	* Pros: Can potentially be faster since it avoids creating an array copy, as `Array.prototype.sort()` uses the Timsort algorithm.
	* Cons: May not work well for smaller arrays or arrays with a large number of duplicate values, as the time complexity is O(n log n) and sorting a small array can still take significant time.
2. **Array.sort()**:
	* Pros: Is generally more flexible and can handle cases where `Int32Array` wouldn't work, such as when dealing with strings or objects that need to be compared using a custom logic.
	* Cons: Requires creating an array copy (if the original array is modified), which may not be desirable in certain situations.

**Library usage**

The test case uses the `Int32Array` constructor and its `sort()` method, which is part of the ECMAScript standard. No additional libraries are required.

**Special JS feature or syntax**

There's no special JavaScript feature or syntax used in this benchmark that would require specific knowledge or implementation details.

**Other alternatives**

To test similar scenarios, you could consider:

1. **NativeArray.sort()**: If available on your platform, testing the `NativeArray` (also known as Native Integer32Array) constructor and its `sort()` method might provide more comparable results to `Int32Array.sort()`.
2. **Custom sorting algorithms**: Implementing a custom sorting algorithm using JavaScript would allow you to compare different approaches without relying on built-in methods.
3. **Other data structures**: Testing with other data structures, such as `Float64Array`, `Set`, or `Map`, could provide insights into how sorting performance varies across different types of collections.

Overall, this benchmark provides a good starting point for understanding the relative performance differences between using `Int32Array` and native `Array` methods for sorting arrays in JavaScript.

Related benchmarks:

Int32Array.sort vs Array.sort (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Int32Array.sort vs Array.sort

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Int32Array.sort

Array.sort

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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