Benchmark: slice vs substr vs substring (with no end index)

Script Preparation code:

var example = 'there is no spoon'

Tests:

slice
var result = example.slice(10)
substr
var result = example.substr(10)
substring
var result = example.substring(10)

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 1,052 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 831 runs

slice

26.3M/s

substr

26.2M/s

substring

26.0M/s

View exact numbers

✓ slice: 26,316,470 ops/sec
• substr: 26,185,510 ops/sec
• substring: 26,009,332 ops/sec

Firefox 127 runs

slice

767.7M/s

substring

745.0M/s

substr

741.6M/s

View exact numbers

✓ slice: 767,651,456 ops/sec
• substring: 745,024,960 ops/sec
• substr: 741,618,368 ops/sec

Safari 54 runs

substring

30.0M/s

slice

30.0M/s

substr

22.6M/s

Fastest: substring (1.3x faster)

View exact numbers

✓ substring: 30,005,708 ops/sec
• slice: 29,958,860 ops/sec
• substr: 22,615,116 ops/sec

Other 17 runs

substr

14.0M/s

substring

13.9M/s

slice

13.8M/s

View exact numbers

✓ substr: 14,039,904 ops/sec
• substring: 13,925,229 ops/sec
• slice: 13,753,495 ops/sec

Mobile Results:

Chrome 23 runs

slice

14.0M/s

substring

13.3M/s

substr

11.8M/s

Fastest: slice (1.2x faster)

View exact numbers

✓ slice: 13,999,319 ops/sec
• substring: 13,348,020 ops/sec
• substr: 11,827,959 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
slice
substr
substring

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/149.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 149 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

slice

333.8M/s

substring

329.2M/s

substr

327.4M/s

View exact numbers

Test name	Executions per second
✓ slice	333,794,432 Ops/sec
substring	329,150,592 Ops/sec
substr	327,376,416 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 benchmark and explain what's being tested, compared, and some of the pros and cons associated with each approach.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark is designed to compare the performance of three JavaScript methods: `slice()`, `substr()`, and `substring()` when used without an end index. The test case uses a predefined string `example` created in the Script Preparation Code, which contains the phrase "there is no spoon".

**What's being compared**

The benchmark compares the execution speed of each method across different browsers (Opera 114) on various devices (Desktop).

**Options Compared**

1. **slice()**: This method returns a new string slice from the original string.
2. **substr()**: This method returns a portion of the string specified by the start index and length.
3. **substring()**: This method is similar to `substr()` but does not include the end index.

**Pros and Cons**

*   **slice()**:
    *   Pros: Generally faster than `substr()` or `substring()` because it doesn't require an explicit length parameter.
    *   Cons: Doesn't account for the potential performance difference between different browsers' implementations of string slicing.
*   **substr()** and **substring()**:
    *   Pros: Explicitly specify the start index, which can be useful in some cases (e.g., avoiding unnecessary memory allocation).
    *   Cons: Potentially slower than `slice()` due to the additional parameter required.

**Library or Special JS Feature**

None of the methods being compared rely on any specific library or feature. However, it's worth noting that modern JavaScript engines often provide optimized implementations for string manipulation methods like these.

**Considerations**

The benchmark assumes a fixed string length and doesn't account for variations in input sizes or complexities. This might lead to inaccurate results when testing with different inputs.

**Alternative Approaches**

Other approaches to compare the performance of `slice()`, `substr()`, and `substring()` could include:

*   Using larger input strings
*   Incorporating more browsers or devices into the benchmark
*   Accounting for differences in JavaScript engine optimizations across various platforms
*   Examining the impact of string normalization or encoding on method performance

These alternatives can provide a more comprehensive understanding of the methods' performance characteristics and help ensure accurate results.

slice vs substr vs substring (with no end index) (version: 1)

Compares slice, substr and substring to each other when there is only a start index

Comparing performance of: `slice vs substr vs substring`

Created: 8 years ago by: Registered User

Go to the latest result

slice

substr

substring

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 1,052 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 831 runs

Firefox 127 runs

Safari 54 runs

Other 17 runs

Mobile Results:

Chrome 23 runs

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

slice vs substr vs substring (with no end index) (version: 1)

Compares slice, substr and substring to each other when there is only a start index

Comparing performance of: slice vs substr vs substring

Created: 8 years ago by: Registered User

Go to the latest result

slice

substr

substring

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 1,052 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 831 runs

Firefox 127 runs

Safari 54 runs

Other 17 runs

Mobile Results:

Chrome 23 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: `slice vs substr vs substring`