Benchmark: Accessing Arrays vs Objects properties

Script Preparation code:

array = [32, 24, 2, 4];
object = { width: 32, height: 24, foo: 2, bar: 4 };

loops = 1000000;
sum = 0;

Tests:

Array access
sum = 0; for(let i = 0; i < loops; i++) { sum += array[0] + array[1] + array[2] + array[3] + i; }
Object access
sum = 0; for(let i = 0; i < loops; i++) { sum += object.width + object.height + object.foo + object.bar + 1; }

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Array access
Object access

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:146.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/146.0

Browser/OS: Firefox 146 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Array access	73.1 Ops/sec
Object access	83.8 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 provided JSON and explain what is being tested.

**Benchmark Definition**
The benchmark definition provides information about the test case, including its name, description (which is empty in this case), and two script preparation codes. These scripts prepare an array and an object with specific properties. The `loops` variable represents the number of iterations for each test, set to 1 million.

**Options Compared**
Two options are being compared:

1. **Array Access**: This option accesses individual elements of the array using bracket notation (`array[0]`, `array[1]`, etc.) and adds a fixed value (`i`) to each element.
2. **Object Access**: This option accesses individual properties of the object using dot notation (`object.width`, `object.height`, etc.) and adds a fixed value (`1`).

**Pros and Cons**

* **Array Access**:
	+ Pros: Likely to be faster since arrays are optimized for direct access.
	+ Cons: May not scale well if the array has many elements, as it involves multiple lookups.
* **Object Access**:
	+ Pros: Allows for easier maintenance and modification of object properties.
	+ Cons: May involve additional overhead due to property lookup and validation.

**Library and Purpose**
The provided script uses no external libraries. However, if we were to analyze the code, we can see that it's using primitive types (e.g., `32`, `24`, `2`, etc.) which are built-in types in JavaScript.

**Special JS Feature/Syntax**
There is a special syntax used here: **template literals** (`\r\narray[0] + array[1] + ... + i` and `\r\nobject.width + object.height + ... + 1`). Template literals allow you to embed expressions inside string literals, which can be useful for creating dynamic strings.

**Other Alternatives**
If this benchmark were to be run in a different environment or with different optimizations enabled, the results might vary. Some alternative approaches could include:

* Using `Math.random()` instead of adding a fixed value (`i`) to access elements.
* Adding more elements to the array or object to see how performance scales.
* Implementing custom iteration using loops (e.g., using `for...of` or `setInterval()`).
* Using specialized libraries like NumJS for numerical computations.

Keep in mind that these alternatives would likely change the results of the benchmark significantly.

Related benchmarks:

Accessing Arrays vs Objects properties (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Array access vs Object access

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Array access

Object access

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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