Benchmark: async for vs promise.all vs for await

Script Preparation code:

async function asyncFor(){
    for (const x of [1, 2, 3]) {
        await new Promise(resolve => resolve(x > 0));
    }
}

async function promiseAll() {
    await Promise.all([1, 2, 3].map(x =>
        new Promise(resolve => resolve(x > 0))
    ));
}

async function forAwait(){
    for await (const x of [1, 2, 3]) {
        await new Promise(resolve => resolve(x > 0));
    }
}

Tests:

async For
asyncFor()
PromiseAll
promiseAll()
For await
forAwait()

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 13 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 13 runs

async For

3.7M/s

For await

2.7M/s

PromiseAll

1.3M/s

Fastest: async For (2.9x faster)

View exact numbers

✓ async For: 3,662,064 ops/sec
• For await: 2,683,822 ops/sec
• PromiseAll: 1,250,604 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
async For
PromiseAll
For await

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/138.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 138 on Linux

View result in a separate tab

async For

4.2M/s

For await

2.9M/s

PromiseAll

1.5M/s

View exact numbers

Test name	Executions per second
✓ async For	4,187,243 Ops/sec
For await	2,881,119 Ops/sec
PromiseAll	1,460,868 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 definition and test cases.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark is designed to compare three different approaches for handling asynchronous iteration:

1. **async For**: uses `for...of` loop with `await` keyword inside the loop body.
2. **PromiseAll**: uses `Promise.all()` method to execute multiple promises concurrently.
3. **For Await**: uses `for await...of` loop, which is similar to traditional `for...of`, but allows using `await` expression inside the loop body.

**Options Comparison**

The three options differ in their approach to handling asynchronous iteration:

* **async For**: executes each iteration synchronously, waiting for the promise resolution before moving on to the next iteration.
* **PromiseAll**: executes all promises concurrently and collects the results when all promises are resolved.
* **For Await**: executes each iteration asynchronously, allowing other tasks to run while waiting for the promise resolution.

**Pros and Cons**

Here's a brief summary of the pros and cons of each approach:

* **async For**:
	+ Pros: simple and easy to understand, can be more efficient for small iterations.
	+ Cons: may lead to performance issues if many promises are created in a single iteration, can block other tasks while waiting for promise resolution.
* **PromiseAll**:
	+ Pros: allows concurrent execution of multiple promises, can improve overall performance.
	+ Cons: requires careful handling of error cases, may not be suitable for small iterations where individual promise resolution is important.
* **For Await**:
	+ Pros: similar to async For, but with the added benefit of being able to use `await` expression inside the loop body, allowing for more efficient execution.
	+ Cons: requires support for `for await...of` syntax in the JavaScript engine.

**Library and Special JS Features**

The benchmark uses built-in JavaScript features:

* **async/await**: used to handle asynchronous iteration in each approach.
* **Promise.all()**: used to execute multiple promises concurrently in the PromiseAll approach.
* **for await...of**: used in the For Await approach to iterate over values asynchronously.

**Test Users Special JS Feature or Syntax**

The benchmark uses the `for await` syntax, which was introduced in ECMAScript 2017 (ES7). This feature allows using `await` expression inside a loop to handle asynchronous iteration.

**Other Alternatives**

If you're interested in exploring other alternatives, here are a few options:

* **Using Web Workers**: you can use web workers to execute tasks concurrently, which might be suitable for CPU-bound tasks.
* **Using async/await with individual promises**: instead of using `Promise.all()`, you can use `async/await` to handle each promise individually, allowing more control over the execution order.
* **Using other iteration methods**: there are other iteration methods available in JavaScript, such as using `forEach()` or `map()`, which might be suitable for specific use cases.

async for vs promise.all vs for await (version: 0) Benchmark.js

Comparing performance of: `async For vs PromiseAll vs For await`

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

async For

PromiseAll

For await

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 13 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 13 runs

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

async for vs promise.all vs for await (version: 0) Benchmark.js

Comparing performance of: async For vs PromiseAll vs For await

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

async For

PromiseAll

For await

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 13 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 13 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: `async For vs PromiseAll vs For await`