Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
toFixed vs toPrecision vs Math.round() feat. Math.pow
(version: 0)
Let's see which is faster and slower! toFixed(6) vs toPrecision(6) vs Math.round(number*Math.pow(10,6) / Math.pow(10,6))
Comparing performance of:
toFixed(6) vs toPrecision(6) vs Math.round()
Created:
3 years ago
by:
Registered User
Jump to the latest result
Script Preparation code:
var randomFloat = 0.123456789;
Tests:
toFixed(6)
Number(randomFloat.toFixed(6));
toPrecision(6)
Number(randomFloat.toPrecision(6));
Math.round()
Math.round(randomFloat*Math.pow(10,6) / Math.pow(10,6))
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (3)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
toFixed(6)
toPrecision(6)
Math.round()
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):
Let's break down the provided JSON and explain what's being tested in each benchmark. **Benchmark Definition** The `Name` field specifies that this is a comparison between three approaches: 1. `toFixed(6)`: This uses the built-in JavaScript method to convert a number to a string with a specified number of decimal places. 2. `toPrecision(6)`: This also converts a number to a string, but it allows more precision than `toFixed`, making it suitable for cases where an exact representation is required. 3. `Math.round(number * Math.pow(10, 6) / Math.pow(10, 6))`: This approach uses the `Math.round` function with a multiplier of 1 million to achieve the same result as `toFixed(6)` and `toPrecision(6)`. **Pros and Cons** Each approach has its advantages: * `toFixed(6)`: Easy to use and works well for most cases, but can lead to rounding errors if the input number is not a multiple of 10^(-6). * `toPrecision(6)`: More precise than `toFixed`, but slower due to the additional computation required to calculate the precision. * `Math.round(number * Math.pow(10, 6) / Math.pow(10, 6))`: The most accurate approach, but requires more computation and may be slower than the other two. **Library** None of these approaches rely on any specific JavaScript library. **Special JS Feature or Syntax** The `toFixed` and `toPrecision` methods are part of the ECMAScript standard and have been supported in JavaScript since its inception. The `Math.round` function is also a built-in method that has been available since the earliest versions of JavaScript. **Other Alternatives** If you needed to achieve this functionality without using these specific approaches, you could consider: * Using a library like `decimal.js` or `bonum decimal` for precise arithmetic operations. * Implementing your own custom rounding function using bitwise shifts and divisions (less accurate than the built-in methods). * Using string manipulation to convert numbers to strings with a specified number of decimal places. **Benchmark Preparation Code** The provided script preparation code generates a random floating-point number `randomFloat` with six decimal places, which is used as input for each benchmark. In summary, this benchmark compares the performance of three different approaches for converting a floating-point number to a string with six decimal places: `toFixed`, `toPrecision`, and `Math.round`.
Related benchmarks:
toFixed vs toPrecision vs Math.round() vs Math.floorfaster test
toFixed vs toPrecision vs Math.round() asd
toFixed vs toPrecision vs Math.round() with constant multiplier
toFixed vs Math.round() sd6f54sd6f54
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?