Benchmark: round vs trunc vs floor vs toFixed vs parseFloat vs parseInt

Tests:

trunc
Math.trunc(13.37) Math.trunc(13.67)
floor
Math.floor(13.37) Math.floor(13.67)

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
trunc
floor

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: one year ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/131.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 131 on Linux

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
trunc	130475032.0 Ops/sec
floor	123754840.0 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down what's being tested in the provided JSON.

**Benchmark Purpose:**
The benchmark compares various methods for rounding or converting numbers in JavaScript, specifically:

1. `Math.trunc()`
2. `Math.floor()`
3. `toFixed()` with a specific number of decimal places (not explicitly mentioned in the JSON)
4. `parseFloat()` with a specific number of decimal places (not explicitly mentioned in the JSON)
5. `parseInt()` (not explicitly used, but implied as part of the comparison)

**Comparison Options:**
The benchmark compares two methods for each test case:

1. **Round vs Truncate**: `Math.trunc(13.37)` vs `Math.trunc(13.67)`
	* Pros:
		+ Both are simple and efficient.
		+ Can be used in various situations where a small fraction of the number needs to be removed.
	* Cons:
		+ May lose precision, especially for larger numbers or smaller fractions.
2. **Round vs Floor**: `Math.floor(13.37)` vs `Math.floor(13.67)`
	* Pros:
		+ Both are useful when dealing with non-negative integers or specific ranges of numbers.
	* Cons:
		+ May not be suitable for all cases, such as negative numbers or decimal values.

**Other Considerations:**

1. **Number of Decimal Places**: The benchmark uses a fixed number of decimal places (not explicitly mentioned in the JSON) when calling `toFixed()` and `parseFloat()`. This can affect the precision of the results.
2. **Device Platform and Browser**: The benchmark runs on a specific device platform (Desktop) with Chrome 123 as the browser, which might not be representative of all environments.

**Library Usage:**
None of the test cases explicitly use any libraries beyond the standard JavaScript Math library.

**Special JS Features/Syntax:**
No special JavaScript features or syntax are used in these test cases.

Now, let's discuss alternatives to this benchmark:

1. **Other rounding methods**: Other rounding methods like `Math.round()`, `Number.EPSILON` (for relative precision), or specialized libraries like Moment.js for date arithmetic could be added as alternative methods.
2. **Edge Cases**: Edge cases like dealing with very large numbers, negative infinity, or NaN (Not a Number) values might be worth considering to make the benchmark more comprehensive.
3. **Different Browsers and Devices**: Running the benchmark on multiple browsers and devices can provide a more accurate representation of real-world performance.
4. **Multi-threaded Execution**: Measuring the performance with multi-threaded execution can help determine if the results are CPU-bound or I/O-bound.

By exploring these alternatives, developers can gain a deeper understanding of how different rounding methods perform in various scenarios, making it easier to choose the most suitable approach for their specific use case.

Related benchmarks:

round vs trunc vs floor vs toFixed vs parseFloat vs parseInt (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: trunc vs floor

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

trunc

floor

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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