Toggle navigation
MeasureThat
.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
Custom Benchmark 1234
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
with map... vs with object...
Created:
2 years ago
by:
Guest
Go to the latest result
Script Preparation code:
var data = []; for (let i = 0; i < 1000; i++) { data.push([`field_${i}`, 'somve_value']) }
Tests:
with map...
const map = new Map(); for (let i = 0; i < data.length; i++) { map.set(data[i], true); }
with object...
const map = {}; for (let i = 0; i < data.length; i++) { map[data[i]] = true; }
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
with map...
with object...
Fastest:
N/A
Slowest:
N/A
Latest run results:
Run details:
(Test run date:
2 years ago
)
User agent:
Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/119.0.0.0 Safari/537.36
Browser/OS:
Chrome 119 on Mac OS X 10.15.7
View result in a separate tab
Embed
Embed Benchmark Result
<iframe src="https://measurethat.net/Embed?id=487394" width="100%" height="500px"></iframe>
with map...
10K/s
with object...
2K/s
View exact numbers
Test name
Executions per second
✓
with map...
9,613 Ops/sec
with object...
2,414 Ops/sec
Autogenerated LLM Summary
(model
llama3.2:3b
, generated one year ago):
Measuring performance of JavaScript microbenchmarks can be a fascinating topic. **What is being tested?** The provided JSON represents two individual test cases for a benchmarking exercise, which compares the performance of creating and populating a Map object versus an Object in JavaScript. A Map is a data structure that stores key-value pairs, where each key is unique and maps to a specific value. In contrast, an Object is a collection of properties with values. **Options being compared:** There are two primary approaches being tested: 1. **Using the `Map` constructor**: This approach creates a new Map instance using the `new` keyword, followed by a for loop that sets each key-value pair in the map. 2. **Using an object literal**: This approach creates a new object literal (i.e., a new object without the `new` keyword) and uses the syntax `map[key] = value;` to set each key-value pair. **Pros and cons of each approach:** 1. **Using the `Map` constructor**: * Pros: + More concise and expressive code. + Better performance due to optimized implementation. * Cons: + Requires knowledge of the Map object's existence and syntax. 2. **Using an object literal**: * Pros: + Easier to understand for developers familiar with JavaScript objects. + Less prone to errors, as it follows a more traditional object creation pattern. * Cons: + More verbose code compared to the Map constructor approach. **Other considerations:** * The use of `const` keyword implies that the map/object is not intended to be reassigned or modified after initialization. * The use of a for loop suggests a simple iteration over the data, rather than more complex logic. **Library usage: None** There are no external libraries being used in these test cases. However, it's worth noting that if other libraries were involved (e.g., `lodash` or `ramda`), their APIs and performance characteristics would be an additional factor to consider. **Special JS features or syntax: None** This benchmark does not rely on any special JavaScript features or syntax beyond standard ECMAScript 2022 language support.
Related benchmarks
let vs var for loop
Million loops
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?