Benchmark: getting seconds from milliseconds

Script Preparation code:

this.numA = Math.random() * 100000;

Tests:

Math.floor
return Math.floor(this.numA / 1000);
% operator
return (this.numA - this.numA % 1000) / 1000;

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Math.floor
% operator

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/131.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 131 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Math.floor	76516792.0 Ops/sec
% operator	52531804.0 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

I'll explain the benchmark in detail, breaking down what's being tested and the different approaches compared.

**Benchmark Overview**

The provided JSON represents a JavaScript microbenchmark that tests two different approaches to calculate the number of seconds from milliseconds. The test is designed to measure the performance difference between these two methods on various browsers and devices.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark definition consists of a single line of code:
```javascript
return Math.floor(this.numA / 1000);
```
This code defines a function that takes a random number `this.numA` generated in the script preparation code, divides it by 1000 using floating-point division (`/`), and then applies the `Math.floor()` function to round down the result.

**Script Preparation Code**

The script preparation code is used to generate a random value for `this.numA`, which is:
```javascript
this.numA = Math.random() * 100000;
```
This code generates a random integer between 0 and 100,000 using `Math.random()`.

**HTML Preparation Code**

There is no HTML preparation code provided in this benchmark.

**Test Cases**

The benchmark consists of two test cases:

1. **"Math.floor"`**

This test case measures the performance of the `Math.floor()` function when applied to the result of dividing `this.numA` by 1000.
```javascript
return Math.floor(this.numA / 1000);
```
**Pros and Cons:**

* Pros:
	+ Simple and efficient implementation using the built-in `Math.floor()` function.
	+ Easy to understand and implement.
* Cons:
	+ May incur a small overhead due to the explicit rounding operation.

2. **"%" operator`**

This test case measures the performance of dividing `this.numA` by 1000 using floating-point division (`/`) followed by applying the modulo (`%`) operator to extract the integer part.
```javascript
return (this.numA - this.numA % 1000) / 1000;
```
**Pros and Cons:**

* Pros:
	+ Avoids explicit rounding, which can be faster and more efficient.
	+ Can take advantage of CPU optimizations for floating-point division and modulo operations.
* Cons:
	+ More complex implementation requiring an additional operation (`-`) to extract the integer part.
	+ May have a higher overhead due to the additional operations.

**Library**

There is no external library used in this benchmark. The code only relies on built-in JavaScript functions (`Math.random()`, `Math.floor()`).

**Special JS Feature/Syntax**

None of the test cases use any special JavaScript features or syntax, such as async/await, destructuring, or template literals.

**Alternatives**

If you were to write a similar benchmark, you could consider using alternative approaches, such as:

* Using a specialized library for performance benchmarking, like Benchmark.js.
* Implementing the tests in a language with better performance characteristics, such as Rust or C++.
* Using a Just-In-Time (JIT) compiler, like SpiderMonkey or V8, to optimize the code.

However, since this is a simple JavaScript microbenchmark, it's likely that using built-in functions and libraries will be sufficient.

Related benchmarks:

getting seconds from milliseconds (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Math.floor vs % operator

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Math.floor

% operator

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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