Benchmark: BigInt vs ParseInt

Script Preparation code:

a = '1670439601590290615'
b = '1670439601590292475'

Tests:

BigInt
BigInt(a) <= BigInt(b);
parseInt
parseInt(a) <= parseInt(b);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
BigInt
parseInt

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/127.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 127 on Linux

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
BigInt	4681534.5 Ops/sec
parseInt	4140074.8 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 benchmark and its options.

**What is tested?**

The benchmark compares two approaches for converting large strings to an integer-comparable format:

1. `BigInt(a) <= BigInt(b)`
2. `parseInt(a) <= parseInt(b)`

Here, `a` and `b` are large strings containing a very big number (1670439601590290615).

**Options compared**

The two options being compared are:

1. **BigInt**: A JavaScript primitive type introduced in ECMAScript 2019 for representing arbitrary-precision integers.
2. **parseInt**: A built-in JavaScript function that converts a string to an integer, but may lose precision or introduce errors for very large numbers.

**Pros and Cons of each approach**

* **BigInt**
	+ Pros:
		- Can accurately represent extremely large integers without loss of precision.
		- Provides a more precise and reliable way of working with integers in JavaScript.
	+ Cons:
		- Is a relatively new feature, so not all browsers support it (as seen in the benchmark results).
		- May have performance implications due to its internal workings.
* **parseInt**
	+ Pros:
		- Widely supported by most browsers and engines.
		- Fast execution speed, as it's an optimized function.
	+ Cons:
		- May lose precision or introduce errors for very large numbers.
		- Limited range of values that can be accurately represented.

**Library/Function usage**

The benchmark uses the `parseInt` function to convert the strings to integers. Note that `parseInt` has some nuances, such as:

* By default, `parseInt` will return 0 if it cannot parse the string to an integer.
* If you pass a second argument (the radix), `parseInt` can convert the string using a different base (e.g., hexadecimal).

**Special JS feature/syntax**

This benchmark does not use any special JavaScript features or syntax. It's focused on comparing two straightforward approaches for converting strings to integers.

**Other alternatives**

If you were to modify this benchmark, you could consider adding other options, such as:

* Using `Number` (a built-in JavaScript function that can convert strings to numbers) instead of `BigInt` or `parseInt`.
* Using a third-party library like `Big.js` or `decimal.js` for precise arithmetic operations.
* Adding more variations in the input data, such as different string representations or edge cases.

Keep in mind that each alternative would introduce new factors to consider when designing and executing your benchmark.

Related benchmarks:

BigInt vs ParseInt (version: 0)

Compares whether BigInt or parseInt is faster for converting large strings to an int-comparable format

Comparing performance of: BigInt vs parseInt

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

BigInt

parseInt

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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