Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
crypto.getRandomValues vs Math.random()
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
crypto.getRandomValues() vs Math.random()
Created:
3 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
Tests:
crypto.getRandomValues()
crypto.getRandomValues(new Uint32Array(1))[0]
Math.random()
Math.random()
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
crypto.getRandomValues()
Math.random()
Fastest:
N/A
Slowest:
N/A
Latest run results:
Run details:
(Test run date:
one year ago
)
User agent:
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/130.0.0.0 Safari/537.36
Browser/OS:
Chrome 130 on Windows
View result in a separate tab
Embed
Embed Benchmark Result
Test name
Executions per second
crypto.getRandomValues()
389808.4 Ops/sec
Math.random()
5357820.5 Ops/sec
Autogenerated LLM Summary
(model
llama3.2:3b
, generated one year ago):
Let's break down the provided benchmark and explain what is being tested. **Overview** The test measures the performance difference between two approaches: `crypto.getRandomValues()` and `Math.random()`. The goal is to determine which method provides better randomness and consistency for generating random numbers in JavaScript. **Options Compared** * `crypto.getRandomValues()` vs `Math.random()`: These are the two approaches being compared. `crypto.getRandomValues()` is a system-provided function that generates cryptographically secure pseudo-random numbers, while `Math.random()` uses an algorithm-based approach to generate pseudo-random numbers. **Pros and Cons of Each Approach** * **`crypto.getRandomValues()`**: Pros: + Provides cryptographically secure random numbers, suitable for applications requiring high security. + Can be used for generating truly unpredictable numbers. * Cons: + May have performance overhead due to its security-focused nature. * `Math.random()`: Pros: + Fast and efficient, making it suitable for high-performance applications. + Easy to use and integrate into existing codebases. * Cons: + Generates pseudo-random numbers that may not be suitable for cryptographic purposes or applications requiring extremely high randomness. **Library and Its Purpose** The `crypto` module is a built-in JavaScript library that provides various functions for cryptography, random number generation, and more. In this case, the `getRandomValues()` function is used to generate cryptographically secure pseudo-random numbers. The purpose of this function is to provide a reliable way to generate truly unpredictable random numbers suitable for security-critical applications. **Special JS Feature or Syntax** None mentioned in this specific benchmark. **Other Considerations** * Performance: The test measures the execution rate (executions per second) of each approach, indicating which one performs better. * Security: As mentioned earlier, `crypto.getRandomValues()` provides cryptographically secure random numbers, making it more suitable for security-critical applications. `Math.random()`, on the other hand, generates pseudo-random numbers that may not be sufficient for such use cases. **Alternatives** Other alternatives for generating random numbers in JavaScript include: * The `web crypto API` (Web Cryptography API): A more modern and secure way of generating cryptographically secure random numbers. * External libraries like `random-js`, `randkit`, or `crypto-random-filler`: These libraries provide additional features, such as seeded random number generators, for applications requiring high-quality randomness. Keep in mind that the choice of approach depends on the specific use case, performance requirements, and security concerns.
Related benchmarks:
repeated Math.random() vs crypto.getRandomValues()
Math.random vs crypto.getRandom Alberto
Math.random+Math.floor vs crypto.getRandom
Math.floor(Math.random()) vs crypto.getRandom
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?