Benchmark: Some vs. Filter vs. indexOf

Script Preparation code:

var hasZero = [];
var withoutZero = [];
for (var i = 0; i < 10000; i++) {
  hasZero.push(Math.floor(Math.random() * 1000));
  withoutZero.push(Math.floor(Math.random() * 1000) + 1)
}

Tests:

Array.some
var tempResult = !!Math.round(Math.random()) ? hasZero.some(v => v === 0) : withoutZero.some(v => v === 0);
Array.filter
var tempResult = !!Math.round(Math.random()) ? hasZero.filter(v => v === 0) : withoutZero.filter(v => v === 0);
Array.indexOf
var tempResult = !!Math.round(Math.random()) ? hasZero.indexOf(0) > -1 : withoutZero.indexOf(0) > -1;

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 227 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 181 runs

Array.indexOf

1.4M/s

Array.some

223K/s

Array.filter

49K/s

Fastest: Array.indexOf (27.9x faster)

View exact numbers

✓ Array.indexOf: 1,363,023 ops/sec
• Array.some: 222,840 ops/sec
• Array.filter: 48,770 ops/sec

Firefox 35 runs

Array.indexOf

199K/s

Array.some

31K/s

Array.filter

18K/s

Fastest: Array.indexOf (11.2x faster)

View exact numbers

✓ Array.indexOf: 199,400 ops/sec
• Array.some: 31,168 ops/sec
• Array.filter: 17,794 ops/sec

Mobile Results:

Chrome 11 runs

Array.indexOf

710K/s

Array.some

73K/s

Array.filter

29K/s

Fastest: Array.indexOf (24.9x faster)

View exact numbers

✓ Array.indexOf: 709,869 ops/sec
• Array.some: 72,865 ops/sec
• Array.filter: 28,565 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
Array.some
Array.filter
Array.indexOf

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:152.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/152.0

Browser/OS: Firefox 152 on Linux

View result in a separate tab

Array.indexOf

280K/s

Array.some

38K/s

Array.filter

20K/s

View exact numbers

Test name	Executions per second
✓ Array.indexOf	280,056 Ops/sec
Array.some	38,466 Ops/sec
Array.filter	20,006 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 JSON data for the JavaScript microbenchmark.

**What is tested:**

The benchmark compares three different approaches to filter an array of numbers with zeros:

1. `Array.some()`: Returns true if at least one element in the array satisfies the condition (in this case, `v === 0`).
2. `Array.filter()`: Returns a new array with only the elements that satisfy the condition (in this case, `v === 0`).
3. `Array.indexOf()`: Returns the index of the first occurrence of the specified value (in this case, `0`). If the value is not found, it returns -1.

**Options compared:**

The benchmark compares three different approaches:

* `some()` vs. `filter()`: Both methods are used to check for the presence of zeros in the array.
* `indexOf()` vs. `some()` and `filter()`: `indexOf()` is a more specialized method that finds the index of a specific value, whereas `some()` and `filter()` provide a more general way to check for elements.

**Pros and Cons:**

1. **Array.some():**
	* Pros:
		+ Simple and concise syntax.
		+ Can be used as a shorthand for more complex logic.
	* Cons:
		+ May be slower than `filter()` because it has to iterate over the entire array until it finds a match.
		+ Returns true if at least one element is found, which may not be what the developer intended.
2. **Array.filter():**
	* Pros:
		+ More explicit and flexible syntax than `some()`.
		+ Returns a new array with only the elements that satisfy the condition.
	* Cons:
		+ May require more code to achieve the desired result.
3. **Array.indexOf():**
	* Pros:
		+ Fastest of the three methods, as it uses an optimized algorithm to find the index of the value.
	* Cons:
		+ More specialized and less flexible than `some()` and `filter()`.
		+ Returns -1 if the value is not found, which may require additional handling.

**Library usage:**

None of the test cases use any external libraries. The benchmark only relies on built-in JavaScript methods.

**Special JS features or syntax:**

The benchmark uses a few features that are specific to JavaScript:

* `var` keyword for variable declarations.
* `some()` and `filter()` methods, which are part of the ECMAScript standard.
* `Math.round()` function, which rounds a number to the nearest integer.

Other alternatives:

For filtering arrays with zeros, you can also use other approaches such as:

* Using the `every()` method in combination with `!`
* Using the `includes()` method (available in modern browsers)
* Implementing your own custom filter function using a loop or recursion

Keep in mind that the performance difference between these alternatives may be negligible for small arrays, but can add up for larger datasets.

Some vs. Filter vs. indexOf (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: `Array.some vs Array.filter vs Array.indexOf`

Created: 8 years ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

Array.some

Array.filter

Array.indexOf

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 227 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 181 runs

Firefox 35 runs

Mobile Results:

Chrome 11 runs

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

Some vs. Filter vs. indexOf (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Array.some vs Array.filter vs Array.indexOf

Created: 8 years ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

Array.some

Array.filter

Array.indexOf

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 227 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 181 runs

Firefox 35 runs

Mobile Results:

Chrome 11 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: `Array.some vs Array.filter vs Array.indexOf`