Benchmark: JSON.parse vs dataview vs typedarray

Script Preparation code:

var intObj = {alpha:12345678,beta:12345678,charlie:12345678,delta:12345678,foxtrot:12345678}
var typedArray = new Int32Array(12345678,12345678,12345678,12345678,12345678)
var buffer = new ArrayBuffer(20)
var dv = new DataView(buffer)
dv.setInt32(0,12345678)
dv.setInt32(4,12345678)
dv.setInt32(8,12345678)
dv.setInt32(12,12345678)
dv.setInt32(16,12345678)

Tests:

JSON
let stringy = JSON.stringify(intObj); let parsed = JSON.parse(stringy); let a; a = parsed;
TypedArray
let newBuffer = typedArray.buffer let parsedBuffer = new Int32Array(newBuffer) let b; b = parsedBuffer;
dataview
let dvBuffer = dv.buffer let newView = new DataView(dvBuffer) let c; c = newView;

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 40 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 21 runs

TypedArray

8.7M/s

dataview

7.0M/s

JSON

1.6M/s

Fastest: TypedArray (5.4x faster)

View exact numbers

✓ TypedArray: 8,664,966 ops/sec
• dataview: 6,998,384 ops/sec
• JSON: 1,609,520 ops/sec

Firefox 10 runs

dataview

4.9M/s

TypedArray

4.7M/s

JSON

436K/s

Fastest: dataview (11.3x faster)

View exact numbers

✓ dataview: 4,928,396 ops/sec
• TypedArray: 4,716,281 ops/sec
• JSON: 435,927 ops/sec

Mobile Results:

Chrome 9 runs

TypedArray

2.6M/s

dataview

2.2M/s

JSON

621K/s

Fastest: TypedArray (4.2x faster)

View exact numbers

✓ TypedArray: 2,627,846 ops/sec
• dataview: 2,210,336 ops/sec
• JSON: 621,403 ops/sec

Results show median performance across all community submissions. Run this benchmark yourself to verify on your device.

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
JSON
TypedArray
dataview

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 7 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

dataview

5.9M/s

TypedArray

5.4M/s

JSON

641K/s

View exact numbers

Test name	Executions per second
✓ dataview	5,938,742 Ops/sec
TypedArray	5,418,229 Ops/sec
JSON	640,841 Ops/sec

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 benchmark.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark compares three approaches to represent and manipulate integer data in JavaScript:

1. **JSON**: Using `JSON.stringify()` and `JSON.parse()` to convert an object to a string and back to an object, respectively.
2. **TypedArray**: Using a typed array (`Int32Array`) to store integer values.
3. **DataView**: Using a `DataView` object to view and manipulate the memory of a buffer.

**Options Compared**

The benchmark compares these three approaches in terms of their performance (measured by executions per second) on a Chrome browser running on a Linux desktop.

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

1. **JSON**:
	* Pros: Easy to use, widely supported, and platform-agnostic.
	* Cons: May incur overhead due to string manipulation, can lead to security vulnerabilities if not properly sanitized, and may not perform well for large datasets.
2. **TypedArray**:
	* Pros: Provides direct access to memory, efficient for large datasets, and allows for fine-grained control over data types.
	* Cons: Can be error-prone if not used correctly, requires manual management of buffer allocation and deallocation, and may have performance implications due to the overhead of typed array operations.
3. **DataView**:
	* Pros: Offers a convenient abstraction over memory views, easy to use, and can provide good performance for certain use cases.
	* Cons: May not be as efficient as typed arrays for large datasets, requires manual management of buffer allocation and deallocation, and can lead to security vulnerabilities if not properly sanitized.

**Library and Its Purpose**

In the benchmark, `DataView` is a built-in JavaScript object that allows you to view and manipulate the memory of a buffer. It provides an efficient way to access binary data in a platform-agnostic manner.

**Special JS Feature or Syntax**

There are no special features or syntaxes being tested in this benchmark. The focus is on comparing three common approaches to represent and manipulate integer data in JavaScript.

**Other Alternatives**

Some other alternatives for representing and manipulating integer data in JavaScript include:

1. **BigInt**: Introduced in ECMAScript 2020, `BigInt` provides a way to work with integers that can be arbitrarily large.
2. **ArrayBuffers**: Similar to typed arrays, array buffers provide direct access to memory and are efficient for large datasets.

In summary, this benchmark compares three approaches to represent and manipulate integer data in JavaScript: JSON, TypedArray, and DataView. Each approach has its pros and cons, and the choice of which one to use depends on the specific requirements and constraints of the project.

JSON.parse vs dataview vs typedarray (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: `JSON vs TypedArray vs dataview`

Created: 3 years ago by: Registered User

Go to the latest result

JSON

TypedArray

dataview

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 40 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 21 runs

Firefox 10 runs

Mobile Results:

Chrome 9 runs

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

JSON.parse vs dataview vs typedarray (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: JSON vs TypedArray vs dataview

Created: 3 years ago by: Registered User

Go to the latest result

JSON

TypedArray

dataview

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 40 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 21 runs

Firefox 10 runs

Mobile Results:

Chrome 9 runs

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

Related benchmarks

Comparing performance of: `JSON vs TypedArray vs dataview`