Benchmark: Instantiation of ArrayBuffer vs Normal

Script Preparation code:

var last = 100000;

Tests:

Uint32
for (let i; i < last; i++) { const x = new ArrayBuffer(4); const y = new Uint32Array(x); y[0] = 16777215; }
Normal
for (let i; i < last; i++) { var y = 16777215; }
Uint32Array
const x = new ArrayBuffer(4 * last); const y = new Uint32Array(x); last = y.length; for (let i; i < last; i++) { y[0] = 16777215; }

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Uint32
Normal
Uint32Array

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 4 months ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:145.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/145.0

Browser/OS: Firefox 145 on Linux

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Uint32	718903168.0 Ops/sec
Normal	674071424.0 Ops/sec
Uint32Array	19874.7 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 JavaScript microbenchmark provided by MeasureThat.net.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark measures the performance of three approaches to create and use `Uint32` variables in JavaScript:

1. **Instantiation of ArrayBuffer vs Normal**: This test compares two approaches:
	* **Normal**: Creating a `Uint32` variable without allocating any memory.
	* **Instantiation of ArrayBuffer**: Allocating memory for an `ArrayBuffer` using the `new ArrayBuffer()` constructor, and then creating a `Uint32` view from that buffer.

**Pros and Cons**

* **Normal**:
	+ Pros: Lightweight allocation with no overhead.
	+ Cons: May be slower due to JavaScript's garbage collection mechanisms.
* **Instantiation of ArrayBuffer**:
	+ Pros: Allows for fine-grained control over memory allocation, which can lead to better performance in some cases.
	+ Cons: Allocations and deallocations can introduce additional overhead.

**Library and Purpose**

None mentioned in the provided benchmark definition. However, it's worth noting that `Uint32Array` is a typed array implementation that provides a more efficient way of working with 32-bit unsigned integers compared to the traditional `Uint32` variable.

The test cases use no special JavaScript features or syntax beyond what's standard in modern JavaScript. The use of `let i;` and `for (let i; i < last; i++)` is an example of a simple loop construct, which is a fundamental building block in many programming languages.

**Other Alternatives**

If you're interested in exploring alternative approaches to this benchmark, here are some options:

1. **Using typed arrays directly**: Instead of creating `Uint32Array` views from `ArrayBuffers`, you could create the array directly using `new Uint32Array()`. This might be slightly faster or more efficient.
2. **Using native WebAssembly modules**: If you're working with modern browsers, you could explore using WebAssembly (WASM) to compile your JavaScript code into a low-level binary format that can be executed by the browser's WASM runtime. This might provide significant performance benefits, but requires additional setup and expertise.
3. **Profile-guided optimization**: MeasureThat.net's benchmarking framework is designed to help you identify performance bottlenecks in your code. By using profiling tools like Chrome DevTools or Node.js built-in profiler, you can gain more insights into the performance characteristics of different approaches and optimize your code accordingly.

Keep in mind that each alternative approach has its own trade-offs, complexity levels, and potential benefits. The choice ultimately depends on the specific requirements and constraints of your project.

Related benchmarks:

Instantiation of ArrayBuffer vs Normal (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Uint32 vs Normal vs Uint32Array

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Uint32

Normal

Uint32Array

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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