Benchmark: Timezone format: Intl.DateTimeFormat vs. Moment.js vs. Luxon

HTML Preparation code:

<script src="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/luxon/3.3.0/luxon.min.js" integrity="sha512-KKbQg5o92MwtJKR9sfm/HkREzfyzNMiKPIQ7i7SZOxwEdiNCm4Svayn2DBq7MKEdrqPJUOSIpy1v6PpFlCQ0YA==" crossorigin="anonymous" referrerpolicy="no-referrer"></script>

Script Preparation code:

window._date = new Date();
window._now = _date.getTime();
window._iso = _date.toISOString();

Tests:

Native
const dateTimeFormat = new Intl.DateTimeFormat("en-GB", { timeZone: "Europe/Prague", timeZoneName: "longOffset", year: "numeric", month: "2-digit", day: "2-digit", hour: "2-digit", minute: "2-digit", second: "2-digit", }).formatToParts(_now); var dt = {}; dateTimeFormat.forEach((arrayPart) => { if (arrayPart.type !== "literal") { dt[arrayPart.type] = arrayPart.value; } }); var date = `${dt.year}-${dt.month}-${dt.day}T${dt.hour}:${dt.minute}:${dt.second}${dt.timeZoneName.slice(3)}`; console.assert(date === _iso);
Luxon
var date = luxon.DateTime.now().setZone('Europe/Prague').toISO(); console.assert(date === _iso);

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 9 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 9 runs

Luxon

130K/s

Native

17K/s

Fastest: Luxon (7.5x faster)

View exact numbers

✓ Luxon: 129,574 ops/sec
• Native: 17,292 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
Native
Luxon

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/138.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 138 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Luxon

173K/s

Native

26K/s

View exact numbers

Test name	Executions per second
✓ Luxon	172,875 Ops/sec
Native	25,983 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 benchmark and analyze what's being tested.

**Overview**

The benchmark compares the performance of three libraries for date-time formatting: `Intl.DateTimeFormat` (native JavaScript), `Moment.js`, and `Luxon`. The test case creates a specific date-time object, formats it using each library, and asserts that the formatted string matches the expected ISO string.

**Options compared**

1. **Native JavaScript (`Intl.DateTimeFormat`)**:
	* This is the native JavaScript API for formatting dates and times.
	* It's built into modern browsers and Node.js environments.
	* The advantages are:
		+ Fast execution speed due to being a native implementation.
		+ Low memory usage since it doesn't require any additional dependencies.
	* However, the disadvantages are:
		+ Limited customization options compared to dedicated libraries like Moment.js or Luxon.
2. **Moment.js**:
	* A popular JavaScript library for working with dates and times.
	* It provides a lot of features and customization options, but can be slower than native implementations due to additional processing overhead.
	* The advantages are:
		+ High degree of customization and flexibility.
		+ Extensive documentation and community support.
	* However, the disadvantages are:
		+ Slower execution speed compared to native implementations like `Intl.DateTimeFormat`.
3. **Luxon**:
	* A modern JavaScript library for working with dates and times, developed by Mozilla.
	* It's known for its high performance, ease of use, and customization options.
	* The advantages are:
		+ Fast execution speed comparable to native implementations.
		+ Flexible and customizable API.
4. **Additional considerations**:

* The test case uses a specific locale (`en-GB`) and time zone (`Europe/Prague`), which may affect the results in different environments.

**Library usage**

1. **Moment.js**: Not used directly in this benchmark, but its presence is indicated by the inclusion of the library in the HTML file.
2. **Luxon**: Used in one test case, where it's instantiated with a specific time zone and then formatted using `toISO()` method.
3. **Intl.DateTimeFormat**: Used in the other test case, where it's instantiated with a specific locale and time zone, and then formatted using `formatToParts()` method.

**Special JS features or syntax**

1. **`luxon.DateTime.now().setZone('Europe/Prague')`**: This is an example of Luxon's `DateTime` API, which provides a convenient way to work with dates and times in different time zones.
2. **`Intl.DateTimeFormat()` and its methods (`formatToParts()`, `locale`, etc.)**: These are specific features of the native JavaScript `Intl.DateTimeFormat` API.

**Other alternatives**

If not using `Intl.DateTimeFormat`, other libraries for date-time formatting could be considered, such as:

* `date-fns`
* `dayjs`
* `javascript-timezone`

Keep in mind that each library has its strengths and weaknesses, and the choice of which one to use depends on specific requirements and performance needs.

Timezone format: Intl.DateTimeFormat vs. Moment.js vs. Luxon (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: `Native vs Luxon`

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

Native

Luxon

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 9 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 9 runs

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

Timezone format: Intl.DateTimeFormat vs. Moment.js vs. Luxon (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Native vs Luxon

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

Native

Luxon

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 9 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 9 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: `Native vs Luxon`