Benchmark: testing - MeasureThat.net

Tests:

s1
var x = true; var a = 54; var b = 14; if(x){ for(m=0;m<1000;m+=2){ var z = a+m*b; }; for(m=1;m<1000;m+=2){ var z = -a-m*b; }; } else { for(m=0;m<1000;m++){ var z = a+m*b; }; };
s2
var x = 2; var a = 54; var b = 14; for(m=0;m<1000;m++){ var z = (-(m%x*2-1)*a)+(-(m%x*2-1)*m)*b; };
s12
var x = true; var a = 54; var b = 14; var d = 67; var c = 580; if(x){ for(m=0;m<100;m+=2){ var z = Math.round(Math.sin(a+m*b)*d+c)+Math.round(Math.cos(a+m*b)*d+c); var z = a+m*b; }; for(m=1;m<100;m+=2){ var z = Math.round(Math.sin(-a-m*b)*d+c)+Math.round(Math.cos(-a-m*b)*d+c); }; } else { for(m=0;m<100;m++){ var z = Math.round(Math.sin(a+m*b)*d+c)+Math.round(Math.cos(a+m*b)*d+c); }; };
s22
var x = 2; var a = 54; var b = 14; var d = 67; var c = 580; for(m=0;m<1000;m++){ var z = Math.round(Math.sin((-(m%x*2-1)*a)+(-(m%x*2-1)*m)*b)*d+c)+Math.round(Math.cos((-(m%x*2-1)*a)+(-(m%x*2-1)*m)*b)*d+c); };

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
s1
s2
s12
s22

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.

I'll break down what's being tested on MeasureThat.net, explain the options compared, and discuss the pros and cons of each approach.

**What is being tested?**

MeasureThat.net is testing the performance of JavaScript code on various browsers (in this case, Firefox 56) with different devices (Other), operating systems (Windows 7). The tests are comparing how quickly a specific piece of code can execute.

**Benchmark Definition JSON and Preparation Code**

The Benchmark Definition JSON contains the script that will be executed, along with any additional setup or preparation code. In this case, there is no preparation code specified.

**Individual Test Cases**

There are four test cases (s1, s2, s12, and s22) that vary in their implementation of a single piece of code. The commonality among them is the use of arithmetic operations and conditional statements to generate values for `z`. Here's a brief explanation of each:

* **s1**: This test case uses traditional arithmetic operations (`+` and `-`) to calculate `z`.
* **s2**: This test case introduces a modulo operator (`%`) to cycle through different values, adding complexity to the calculation.
* **s12**: Similar to s2, this test case also uses the modulo operator to generate cyclic values, but with an additional multiplication step.
* **s22**: This test case combines elements of s1 and s12, using both arithmetic operations and the modulo operator.

**Options Compared**

The main options being compared are:

1. **Traditional arithmetic operations (`+` and `-`)**
2. **Modulo operator (`%`)**

Pros and Cons:

* **Traditional arithmetic operations (s1)**:
	+ Pros: Simple, predictable, and easy to understand.
	+ Cons: May be slower due to the simplicity of the calculation.
* **Modulo operator (s2 and s12)**:
	+ Pros: Can generate a wider range of values, potentially increasing performance due to the increased variety of input data.
	+ Cons: More complex calculations can lead to higher overhead, making it harder to predict execution time.

**Other Considerations**

When evaluating these options, consider factors such as:

* **Cache locality**: How well do the different implementations align with cache patterns? Modulo operations might have better cache locality due to their cyclical nature.
* **Branch prediction**: The frequency and distribution of branch instructions can impact performance. Traditional arithmetic operations may be more predictable, while modulo operations can lead to more branches.

**Library Usage**

None of the provided test cases explicitly use any external libraries.

**Special JavaScript Features or Syntax**

The tests do not include any special features like async/await, generator functions, or other modern JavaScript syntax. If they did, it would be interesting to explore how these might impact performance.

**Alternatives**

Other alternatives for benchmarking JavaScript performance include:

* **V8 Benchmark Suite**: Developed by Google, this suite provides a comprehensive set of benchmarks for various JavaScript engines.
* **JSBench**: A popular benchmarking framework that allows developers to create their own benchmarks and run them on multiple browsers.
* **Google's Chrome DevTools**: Provides built-in profiling tools for analyzing JavaScript performance in the browser.

Keep in mind that each alternative has its strengths and weaknesses, and choosing the right one depends on your specific use case and requirements.

Related benchmarks:

testing (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: s1 vs s2 vs s12 vs s22

Created: 8 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

s1

s2

s12

s22

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):