Benchmark: Math.pow vs ** vs * version for squaring

Script Preparation code:

var result = 0

Tests:

pow
let tmp = Math.pow(Math.random(), 2); result ^= tmp;
**
let tmp = Math.random() ** 2; result ^= tmp;
*
let x = Math.random() let tmp = x*x; result ^= tmp;

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
pow
**
*

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

No previous run results

This benchmark does not have any results yet. Be the first one to run it!

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down what's being tested in this benchmark.

**Main Objective:**
The main objective of this benchmark is to compare the performance of three different ways to square a random number:

1. Using the `Math.pow()` function (e.g., `Math.pow(Math.random(), 2)`).
2. Using exponentiation with two asterisks (e.g., `Math.random() ** 2`).
3. Manually squaring the result of a random number (e.g., `x*x`, where `x = Math.random()`).

**Options Compared:**

* `Math.pow()` vs `**` vs Manual Squaring (`x*x`)

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach:**

1. **`Math.pow()`**:
	* Pros: Explicit, readable, and easy to understand.
	* Cons: May be slower due to the overhead of a function call.
2. **`** (exponentiation)**:
	* Pros: Fast, concise, and expressive.
	* Cons: May not be as intuitive for some developers who are not familiar with exponentiation syntax.
3. **Manual Squaring (`x*x`)**:
	* Pros: Fast and efficient.
	* Cons: Requires manual calculation of the square root, which may lead to errors if not done correctly.

**Library Usage:**
None of the test cases use any external libraries.

**Special JS Features/Syntax:**
The benchmark uses a special JavaScript feature called "template literals" (denoted by `\r\n` and `result ^= tmp;` in the HTML Preparation Code). However, it's worth noting that template literals are not enabled by default in all browsers. The benchmark assumes that the browser supports this feature.

**Benchmark Result Interpretation:**
The latest benchmark result shows that:

* Manual Squaring (`x*x`) is the fastest approach (with approximately 33% less executions per second compared to `Math.pow()`).
* Exponentiation with two asterisks (`**`) is faster than manual squaring, but slower than `Math.pow()`.
* The performance of `Math.pow()` and exponentiation with two asterisks is similar.

**Other Alternatives:**
In theory, other alternatives could be used for squaring a random number, such as:

* Using the `Math.sqrt()` function twice: `let tmp = Math.sqrt(Math.random()) * Math.sqrt(Math.random());`
* Using bitwise operations (e.g., shifting and masking): `let x = Math.random(); let tmp = (x << 32) | (x & 0xFFFFFFFF);`

However, these alternatives are not included in the benchmark.

Related benchmarks:

Math.pow vs ** vs * version for squaring (version: 0)

Updated to prevent VM optimizations to remove the functions

Comparing performance of: pow vs ** vs *

Created: 3 years ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

pow

**

*

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

No previous run results

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