Benchmark: Math.max vs reduce vs sort

Script Preparation code:

var values = new Array(5000);

for (let i = 0; i < values.length; ++i) {
    values[i] = { y: i % 20 };
}

Tests:

Reduce
return values.reduce((a,b)=>a.y>b.y?a:b).y;
Sort
return values.sort((a,b)=>b.y-a.y)[0].y;
Max
return Math.max(...values.map(o=>o.y));

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Reduce
Sort
Max

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.

**Overview**

The provided JSON represents a JavaScript microbenchmark test case on the MeasureThat.net website. The benchmark tests three different approaches to find the maximum value in an array of objects: `Math.max`, `reduce()`, and `sort()`.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark definition is a string that specifies the code to be executed for each test case. In this case, there are three test cases:

1. **Reduce**: Finds the maximum value using the `reduce()` method.
2. **Sort**: Sorts the array in descending order and returns the first element's `y` property.
3. **Max**: Uses the `Math.max()` function with an arrow function to find the maximum value.

**Options Compared**

The benchmark compares three different approaches:

1. **Reduce()**: A functional programming approach that iterates over the array, accumulating the maximum value in a variable.
2. **Sort()**: A sorting algorithm-based approach that sorts the array in descending order and returns the first element's `y` property.
3. **Math.max()**: A built-in function-based approach that uses an arrow function to find the maximum value.

**Pros and Cons**

1. **Reduce()**:
	* Pros: Efficient, concise, and easy to understand.
	* Cons: May not be as performant as other approaches for very large arrays.
2. **Sort()**:
	* Pros: Can handle complex sorting logic, but may be slower than other approaches.
	* Cons: Requires sorting the entire array, which can be inefficient for very large datasets.
3. **Math.max()**:
	* Pros: Fast, concise, and easy to understand.
	* Cons: May not work as expected with non-numeric data types.

**Libraries**

There are no external libraries used in this benchmark.

**Special JS Features/Syntax**

There are no special JavaScript features or syntax used in this benchmark. The code is standard ECMAScript 6 (ES6) syntax.

**Other Alternatives**

Other alternatives to these approaches include:

1. **Array.prototype.map()**: Uses the `map()` method to create a new array with the maximum value.
2. **Array.prototype.forEach()**: Uses the `forEach()` method to iterate over the array and find the maximum value.
3. **A custom implementation using a loop**: A simple, manual approach that uses a loop to find the maximum value.

These alternatives are not tested in this benchmark, but they could be explored as part of further analysis or optimization efforts.

Related benchmarks:

Math.max vs reduce vs sort (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Reduce vs Sort vs Max

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Reduce

Sort

Max

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):