Benchmark: sort vs reduce - MeasureThat.net

Script Preparation code:

var a=Array.from({length:100},()=>Math.random())

Tests:

sort
var b = a.slice(); b.sort();
reduce
a.reduce((a,c) => a < c ? a : c)

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 60 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 50 runs

reduce

15.6M/s

sort

94K/s

Fastest: reduce (167.3x faster)

View exact numbers

✓ reduce: 15,642,360 ops/sec
• sort: 93,513 ops/sec

Firefox 10 runs

reduce

3.8M/s

sort

62K/s

Fastest: reduce (60.7x faster)

View exact numbers

✓ reduce: 3,792,278 ops/sec
• sort: 62,445 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
sort
reduce

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:139.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/139.0

Browser/OS: Firefox 139 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

reduce

5.5M/s

sort

113K/s

View exact numbers

Test name	Executions per second
✓ reduce	5,547,264 Ops/sec
sort	113,056 Ops/sec

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 JavaScript microbenchmark.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark compares the performance of two approaches: sorting an array using the `sort()` method and reducing an array to find its minimum value using the `reduce()` method.

**Options Compared**

The two options being compared are:

1. **Sort**: This involves calling the `sort()` method on the original array (`a`) to sort it in ascending order.
2. **Reduce**: This involves using the `reduce()` method to iterate through the array and find the smallest value.

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

**Sort:**

Pros:

* Simple and straightforward implementation
* Well-documented and widely supported

Cons:

* Can be slow for large datasets due to its O(n log n) time complexity
* May cause unnecessary reordering of elements, especially for already sorted arrays

**Reduce:**

Pros:

* More efficient for large datasets (O(n)) since it only iterates through the array once
* Less memory-intensive than sorting, as it doesn't create a new sorted array

Cons:

* Requires more complex implementation and understanding of the `reduce()` method
* May not be as intuitive or widely supported as the `sort()` method

**Other Considerations**

The benchmark is running on a Mac OS X 10.15.7 desktop environment with Chrome 129, which might affect the results.

**Library Used (if any)**

None mentioned in the provided code snippets. However, if you're familiar with JavaScript libraries like Lodash or Ramda, they provide similar functionality for array manipulation and sorting/reducing.

**Special JS Feature/Syntax**

There's no special JavaScript feature or syntax being used in this benchmark that would require specific expertise to understand.

**Other Alternatives**

If you were to create a similar benchmark, you could consider adding other approaches, such as:

* Using a custom sorting algorithm (e.g., insertion sort)
* Employing parallel processing to compare the performance of both methods
* Incorporating modern JavaScript features like async/await or Promises to optimize the testing process

Keep in mind that these alternatives would require significant modifications to the benchmark code and might not be relevant to this specific comparison.

sort vs reduce (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: `sort vs reduce`

Created: 8 years ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

sort

reduce

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 60 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 50 runs

Firefox 10 runs

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

sort vs reduce (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: sort vs reduce

Created: 8 years ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

sort

reduce

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 60 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 50 runs

Firefox 10 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: `sort vs reduce`