Toggle navigation
MeasureThat
.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
if-else vs switch case
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
Switch case vs if-else
Created:
3 years ago
by:
Guest
Go to the latest result
Tests:
Switch case
const a = 1; switch (a) { case 5: console.log("a is 5"); break; case 4: console.log("a is 4"); break; case 3: console.log("a is 4"); break; case 41: console.log("a is 4"); break; case 31: console.log("a is 4"); break; case 42: console.log("a is 4"); break; case 33: console.log("a is 4"); break; case 44: console.log("a is 4"); break; case 35: console.log("a is 4"); break; case 46: console.log("a is 4"); break; case 37: console.log("a is 4"); break; case 48: console.log("a is 4"); break; case 39: console.log("a is 4"); break; case 40: console.log("a is 4"); break; case 311: console.log("a is 4"); break; case 422: console.log("a is 4"); break; case 333: console.log("a is 4"); break; case 444: console.log("a is 4"); break; case 355: console.log("a is 4"); break; case 2: console.log("a is 2"); break; case 1: console.log("a is 1"); break; }
if-else
const a = 1; if (a === 5) { console.log("a is 5"); } else if (a === 4) { console.log("a is 4"); } else if (a === 3) { console.log("a is 4"); } else if (a === 41) { console.log("a is 4"); } else if (a === 31) { console.log("a is 4"); } else if (a === 42) { console.log("a is 4"); } else if (a === 33) { console.log("a is 4"); } else if (a === 44) { console.log("a is 4"); } else if (a === 35) { console.log("a is 4"); } else if (a === 46) { console.log("a is 4"); } else if (a === 37) { console.log("a is 4"); } else if (a === 48) { console.log("a is 4"); } else if (a === 39) { console.log("a is 4"); } else if (a === 40) { console.log("a is 40"); } else if (a === 311) { console.log("a is 311"); } else if (a === 422) { console.log("a is 422"); } else if (a === 333) { console.log("a is 333"); } else if (a === 444) { console.log("a is 444"); } else if (a === 355) { console.log("a is 355"); } else if (a === 2) { console.log("a is 2"); } else if (a === 1) { console.log("a is 1"); }
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
Switch case
if-else
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/124.0.0.0 Safari/537.36
Browser/OS:
Chrome 124 on Mac OS X 10.15.7
View result in a separate tab
Embed
Embed Benchmark Result
<iframe src="https://measurethat.net/Embed?id=524453" width="100%" height="500px"></iframe>
Switch case
348K/s
if-else
339K/s
View exact numbers
Test name
Executions per second
✓
Switch case
347,742 Ops/sec
if-else
339,014 Ops/sec
Autogenerated LLM Summary
(model
llama3.2:3b
, generated one year ago):
Let's dive into explaining the benchmark. **Benchmark Overview** The provided benchmark compares two approaches to handle multiple conditions: `switch case` and `if-else`. The goal is to determine which approach is faster in terms of execution time. **Switch Case** In this approach, we use a `switch` statement to check the value of `a` against various cases. Each case has a specific code block that will be executed if the condition matches. Example: ```javascript const a = 1; switch (a) { case 5: console.log("a is 5"); break; case 4: console.log("a is 4"); break; // ... } ``` **Pros:** * Efficient use of memory, as the compiler can optimize away unnecessary code blocks. * Can handle multiple conditions in a single statement. **Cons:** * Requires explicit `break` statements to exit the switch block, which can lead to mistakes if not used carefully. * May be slower due to the need for a jump table or fall-through optimization by the JavaScript engine. **If-Else** In this approach, we use multiple `if` statements chained together using `else if`. Each condition is checked in sequence until one matches. Example: ```javascript const a = 1; if (a === 5) { console.log("a is 5"); } else if (a === 4) { console.log("a is 4"); } // ... ``` **Pros:** * Easy to read and write, as each condition is self-contained. * Does not require explicit `break` statements. **Cons:** * Can be slower due to the need for multiple checks and potential branch prediction errors. * Requires more memory allocations for temporary variables and stack frames. **Library Used:** The benchmark does not explicitly use any libraries. However, it's worth noting that modern JavaScript engines, including those used by Chrome, have various optimizations and features like Just-In-Time (JIT) compilation, which can affect the performance of these approaches. **Special JS Feature/Syntax:** There are no special JavaScript features or syntaxes mentioned in this benchmark. However, it's essential to consider factors like function call overhead, loop unrolling, and cache locality when optimizing code for performance. **Benchmark Results:** The latest benchmark results show that Chrome 124 on a Mac OS X 10.15.7 Desktop is executing the `switch case` approach (347742.375 executions per second) faster than the `if-else` approach (339014.4375 executions per second). However, please note that these results may not reflect your specific environment or browser version. Keep in mind that this benchmark is a simple example and may not accurately represent real-world use cases. More complex scenarios might require different optimization strategies.
Related benchmarks
Switch vs If else CNC
JS switch vs if/else if
map vs ifelse vs switch test
if-else vs switch-case vs object literals vs ternary-operator 3
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?