Benchmark: Shuffled Array Cache Test 4

Script Preparation code:

var sorted = new Array(200000);
var shuffled = new Array(200000);

class Vector { 
	constructor() {
      this.x = 0;
      this.y = 0;
      this.z = 0;
    }
}

for (let i=0; i<200000; i++) {
  const obj = { position: new Vector(), scale: new Vector(), rotation: new Vector() };
  sorted[i] = obj;
  shuffled[i] = obj;
}

for (let i=0; i<200000; i++) {
  const index = Math.floor(Math.random() * 200000);
  const temp = shuffled[i];
  shuffled[i] = shuffled[index];
  shuffled[index] = temp;
}

Tests:

Sorted
for (let i=0; i<200000; i++) { const obj = sorted[i]; if (obj.position.x === 0) {} }
Shuffled
for (let i=0; i<200000; i++) { const obj = shuffled[i]; if (obj.position.x === 0) {} }
Shuffled reorder
const reordered = new Array(200000); for (let i=0; i<200000; i++) { reordered[i] = shuffled[i]; } for (let i=0; i<200000; i++) { const obj = reordered[i]; if (obj.position.x === 0) {} }

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 5 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 5 runs

Sorted

66/s

Shuffled reorder

58/s

Shuffled

27/s

Fastest: Sorted (2.5x faster)

View exact numbers

✓ Sorted: 66 ops/sec
• Shuffled reorder: 58 ops/sec
• Shuffled: 27 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
Sorted
Shuffled
Shuffled reorder

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 2 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 16_7_2 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/605.1.15 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/16.6 Mobile/15E148 Safari/604.1

Browser/OS: Mobile Safari 16 on iOS 16.7.2

View result in a separate tab

Sorted

31/s

Shuffled reorder

26/s

Shuffled

15/s

View exact numbers

Test name	Executions per second
✓ Sorted	31 Ops/sec
Shuffled reorder	26 Ops/sec
Shuffled	15 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

I'll break down the provided benchmark and explain what's being tested, compared options, pros/cons of each approach, and other considerations.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark measures the performance of accessing elements in an array by their index. There are three test cases:

1. **Sorted**: Accessing elements by their sorted index.
2. **Shuffled**: Accessing elements by their shuffled index.
3. **Shuffled Reorder**: Creating a new shuffled array and then accessing elements by their original index.

**Benchmark Definition JSON**

The benchmark definition contains two scripts: `Script Preparation Code` and `Html Preparation Code`. The former creates an array of 200,000 objects with properties `position`, `scale`, and `rotation`. The latter is empty.

**Individual Test Cases**

Each test case has a unique script that implements the access pattern. Let's analyze each one:

1. **Sorted**: This test case simply accesses elements by their sorted index. The script uses a simple loop to access each element in order.
2. **Shuffled**: Similar to the Sorted test, but with shuffled indices. The script uses the same loop as before, but the indices are randomized.
3. **Shuffled Reorder**: This test creates a new shuffled array and then accesses elements by their original index. The script first shuffles the original array using Fisher-Yates shuffle, and then creates a new array from the shuffled indices.

**Comparison of Access Patterns**

The three access patterns differ in how they handle out-of-bounds or invalid indices:

1. **Sorted**: This test case assumes that all indices are valid and doesn't perform any bounds checking.
2. **Shuffled**: Similar to Sorted, but with randomized indices.
3. **Shuffled Reorder**: This test creates a new array from the shuffled indices, which means it handles out-of-bounds indices by using the original index as a default.

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

1. **Sorted**: Fastest performance, since access is sequential and predictable. However, it assumes all indices are valid.
2. **Shuffled**: Slower performance due to the randomized indices, but it can handle out-of-bounds indices by using the original index as a default.
3. **Shuffled Reorder**: Slowest performance, since creating a new array from shuffled indices is computationally expensive. However, it handles out-of-bounds indices correctly.

**Library and Special JS Features**

The benchmark uses a custom `Vector` class to represent 3D positions, scales, and rotations. This library is not part of the standard JavaScript API and is specific to this benchmark.

**Other Considerations**

* The benchmark uses Mobile Safari 16 as the browser, which may affect performance.
* The device platform is set to Mobile, which may influence performance due to limited resources.
* The operating system is iOS 16.7.2, which is a relatively recent version and may have optimizations for array access.

**Alternatives**

If you want to run this benchmark on a different platform or browser, you can:

1. Update the `Script Preparation Code` to use a different data structure or algorithm.
2. Modify the `Html Preparation Code` to change the browser or device platform.
3. Use a different benchmarking framework or tool.

Keep in mind that the benchmark's performance results may vary depending on the specific hardware and software configuration.

Shuffled Array Cache Test 4 (version: 0) Benchmark.js

Comparing performance of: `Sorted vs Shuffled vs Shuffled reorder`

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

Sorted

Shuffled

Shuffled reorder

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 5 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 5 runs

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

Shuffled Array Cache Test 4 (version: 0) Benchmark.js

Comparing performance of: Sorted vs Shuffled vs Shuffled reorder

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

Sorted

Shuffled

Shuffled reorder

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 5 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 5 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: `Sorted vs Shuffled vs Shuffled reorder`