Benchmark: find vs findIndex speed

Script Preparation code:

var arr = [];
var i = 0;

while (i <= 1E5) arr[i] = i++;

Tests:

Array.prototype.find
const index = arr.find(item => item == 1E5).index;
Array.prototype.findIndex
const index = arr.findIndex(item => item == 1E5);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Array.prototype.find
Array.prototype.findIndex

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 2 months ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:146.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/146.0

Browser/OS: Firefox 146 on Linux

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Array.prototype.find	2111.9 Ops/sec
Array.prototype.findIndex	2270.1 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 is being tested, compared options, pros and cons of each approach, and other considerations.

**What is being tested?**

The provided JSON represents two individual test cases:

1. `Array.prototype.find`
2. `Array.prototype.findIndex`

Both tests are designed to measure the performance difference between these two methods for finding a specific element in an array.

**Options compared:**

Two options are being compared:

A) Using `find()` method
B) Using `findIndex()` method

These two methods have different use cases and performance characteristics.

**Pros and cons of each approach:**

A) **Using `find()` method:**

Pros:

* More intuitive and concise syntax, as it returns the found element directly.
* Can be more readable for simple use cases where you only need to access the value.

Cons:

* Returns `undefined` if no element is found in the array. This can lead to unnecessary iterations if a specific value is not present.
* May incur additional overhead due to optional chaining (`?.`) and optional nullish coalescing (`??`) syntax introduced in ECMAScript 2020.

B) **Using `findIndex()` method:**

Pros:

* Returns the index of the found element directly, eliminating the need for unnecessary iterations if a specific value is present.
* Can be more efficient in cases where you only need to know the index of the element.

Cons:

* Requires an additional step to get the actual element at that index (`arr[index]`).
* May incur additional overhead due to creating and updating a `result` variable.

**Other considerations:**

Both methods have performance implications. The `find()` method tends to be faster when searching for a single value, but slower when searching for multiple values or handling arrays of large sizes. On the other hand, `findIndex()` can be more efficient in these scenarios but requires additional work to access the element.

**Library usage:**

Neither test case uses any external libraries. The code is pure JavaScript.

**Special JS features/syntax:**

None mentioned in this specific benchmark, as both methods have been around since early versions of JavaScript and don't rely on newer syntax or features.

**Alternatives:**

Other alternatives to `find()` and `findIndex()` include:

* Using a library like Lodash's `findIndex` (or similar) for more comprehensive search functionality.
* Implementing your own iterative solution using traditional indexing techniques.
* Utilizing JavaScript's array methods, such as `some()`, `any()`, or custom functions, to achieve the desired result.

In this specific benchmark, the focus is on comparing the performance of `find()` and `findIndex()` directly.

Related benchmarks:

find vs findIndex speed (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Array.prototype.find vs Array.prototype.findIndex

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Array.prototype.find

Array.prototype.findIndex

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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