Toggle navigation
MeasureThat
.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
multiplication vs exponentiation
(version: 0)
is it more performant to multiply a number by itself manually or use the exponentiation operator '**2'?
Comparing performance of:
multiplication operator vs exponentiation operator
Created:
3 years ago
by:
Guest
Go to the latest result
Tests:
multiplication operator
let squared = 345 * 345;
exponentiation operator
let squared = 345**2
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
multiplication operator
exponentiation operator
Fastest:
N/A
Slowest:
N/A
Latest run results:
Run details:
(Test run date:
2 months ago
)
User agent:
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/148.0.0.0 Safari/537.36
Browser/OS:
Chrome 148 on Windows
View result in a separate tab
Embed
Embed Benchmark Result
<iframe src="https://measurethat.net/Embed?id=629387" width="100%" height="500px"></iframe>
exponentiation operator
172.2M/s
multiplication operator
172.2M/s
View exact numbers
Test name
Executions per second
✓
exponentiation operator
172,200,288 Ops/sec
multiplication operator
172,191,280 Ops/sec
Autogenerated LLM Summary
(model
llama3.2:3b
, generated one year ago):
I'll break down the provided benchmark and explain what's being tested, compared, and their pros/cons. **Benchmark Overview** The test measures the performance difference between two approaches to calculate the square of a number: manual multiplication (`*`) vs exponentiation operator (`**`). **Options Compared** 1. **Manual Multiplication**: `let squared = 345 * 345;` * Pros: + Easy to understand and implement for most developers. + Works on older browsers and platforms without support for `**`. * Cons: + More computationally expensive due to repeated multiplication. 2. **Exponentiation Operator**: `let squared = 345**2;` * Pros: + Much faster than manual multiplication, especially for larger numbers. + More concise and readable code. * Cons: + May not work in older browsers or platforms without support for `**`. **Library Used** In both test cases, no libraries are explicitly mentioned. However, the exponentiation operator (`**`) is a built-in JavaScript operator that's supported by most modern browsers. **Special JS Feature/Syntax** The `**` operator is called the "exponentiation operator" or "power operator". It was introduced in ECMAScript 2016 (ES6) as a shorthand for calculating powers. Prior to ES6, developers would use the `Math.pow()` function or calculate powers manually. **Other Alternatives** If you want to implement manual multiplication instead of using the exponentiation operator, you could use the following approach: ```javascript let squared = 345; for (let i = 0; i < 2; i++) { squared *= 345; } ``` However, this approach is less concise and readable compared to using the `**` operator. If you want to explore other alternatives for calculating powers, you could use libraries like Math.js or exponent-js. However, these are not necessary for this simple benchmark. In summary, the provided benchmark tests the performance difference between manual multiplication and the exponentiation operator in JavaScript. The test highlights the benefits of using built-in operators instead of manual calculations, making code more concise and readable.
Related benchmarks
Math.pow vs Exponentiation vs Multiplication
Math.pow vs Exponentiation vs Multiplication pow 4
math.pow vs multiply vs exponentiation
Math.pow vs Exponentiation vs Multiplication 2
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?