Benchmark: Array.sort vs Math.min+Math.max vs reduce on bigger array of objects

Script Preparation code:

var v1 = {index:0};
var v2 = {index:1};

var arr = [v2, v1]

Tests:

Array.sort
var a = arr.sort((a,b) => a.index - b.index); var min = a[0]; var max = a[1];
Math min and max
var a = arr.map(o => o.index); var min = Math.min(...a); var max = Math.max(...a);
reduce with min and max
var max = arr.reduce((a, b) => Math.max(a, b), -Infinity); var min = arr.reduce((a, b) => Math.min(a, b), Infinity);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Array.sort
Math min and max
reduce with min and max

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.

Let's dive into the explanation of the provided benchmark.

**What is being tested?**

The benchmark measures the performance difference between three approaches to find the minimum and maximum values in an array:

1.  **Array.sort**: Using the built-in `sort()` method with a custom compare function to sort the array by the "index" property.
2.  **Math min and max**: Using the `Math.min()` and `Math.max()` functions to find the smallest and largest values in the sorted array.
3.  **Reduce with min and max**: Using the `reduce()` method to apply a custom function that finds both the minimum and maximum values.

**Options comparison**

Here's a brief overview of each approach, including their pros and cons:

1.  **Array.sort**:
    *   Pros: Efficient and straightforward.
    *   Cons: Requires sorting the entire array, which can be slow for large datasets.
2.  **Math min and max**: This method is efficient but may involve unnecessary iterations through the sorted array if the smallest or largest element is not found yet.
3.  **Reduce with min and max**:
    *   Pros: Can potentially find both minimum and maximum values in a single pass, reducing the number of array accesses.
    *   Cons: Requires understanding of the `reduce()` method's behavior and can be more complex to implement.

**Library usage**

None of the benchmark test cases explicitly use any libraries. However, the `sort()` method is a built-in JavaScript function that uses a sorting algorithm (usually Timsort) under the hood.

**Special JS features or syntax**

There are no special JavaScript features or syntaxes being used in these tests; they're focused on showcasing different array processing methods.

**Other alternatives**

Some other approaches to finding the minimum and maximum values in an array include:

*   Using `Array.prototype.every()` and `Array.prototype.some()` to find a value that meets a certain condition.
*   Utilizing a more advanced data structure like a heap or priority queue for faster performance.
*   Leveraging a library like Lodash, which provides optimized functions for common tasks, including finding minima and maxima.

Keep in mind that these alternatives might have different trade-offs in terms of simplicity, readability, and performance.

Related benchmarks:

Array.sort vs Math.min+Math.max vs reduce on bigger array of objects (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Array.sort vs Math min and max vs reduce with min and max

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Array.sort

Math min and max

reduce with min and max

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):