Benchmark: lodash-uuid vs crypto.randomUUID

HTML Preparation code:

<script src="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/lodash.js/4.17.21/lodash.min.js" integrity="sha512-WFN04846sdKMIP5LKNphMaWzU7YpMyCU245etK3g/2ARYbPK9Ub18eG+ljU96qKRCWh+quCY7yefSmlkQw1ANQ==" crossorigin="anonymous" referrerpolicy="no-referrer"></script>

<script>
const randomUUID = () => {
   return crypto.randomUUID()
}
const lodashUUID = () => {
   return _.uniqueId()
}
</script>

Tests:

randomUUID
randomUUID()
lodashUUID
lodashUUID()

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 11 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 11 runs

lodashUUID

77.1M/s

randomUUID

665K/s

Fastest: lodashUUID (116.0x faster)

View exact numbers

✓ lodashUUID: 77,069,664 ops/sec
• randomUUID: 664,593 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
randomUUID
lodashUUID

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/140.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 140 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

lodashUUID

201.6M/s

randomUUID

864K/s

View exact numbers

Test name	Executions per second
✓ lodashUUID	201,554,080 Ops/sec
randomUUID	863,757 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 explain what's being tested.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark measures the performance difference between two approaches to generate unique identifiers:

1. `lodash-uuid` (using Lodash library)
2. `crypto.randomUUID`

Both functions are supposed to return a random, unique identifier.

**Options Compared**

The two options are compared in terms of their execution time and number of executions per second. The benchmark measures how many times each function can be executed within a second, which is a common metric for measuring performance.

**Pros and Cons**

Here's a brief summary of the pros and cons of each approach:

1. **`lodash-uuid` (using Lodash library)**:
	* Pros: Uses a widely-used and well-maintained library (Lodash), which might provide additional functionality beyond just generating unique IDs.
	* Cons: Adds an external dependency, which can increase the benchmark's complexity and potentially introduce other performance issues.
2. **`crypto.randomUUID`**:
	* Pros: Built-in function in Node.js/Crypto API, which means it doesn't add any external dependencies.
	* Cons: Might not be as efficient or have the same level of quality control as a well-tested library like Lodash.

**Library: `lodash`**

Lodash is a popular JavaScript utility library that provides a wide range of functions for tasks such as string manipulation, array operations, and more. In this benchmark, Lodash is used to generate unique identifiers using the `_uniqueId()` function.

The `_.uniqueId()` function generates a random UUID (Universally Unique Identifier) by concatenating four parts: `4` bytes of random data, `-`, 12 hexadecimal digits, and another 4 bytes of random data. This ensures that generated IDs are both unique and have a high level of randomness.

**Special JS Feature or Syntax**

In this benchmark, there is no special JavaScript feature or syntax being tested beyond the two functions being compared: `lodashUUID()` and `randomUUID()`. However, it's worth noting that `crypto.randomUUID()` uses a built-in function in Node.js/Crypto API, which might have some platform-specific dependencies or behaviors not present in other environments.

**Other Alternatives**

If you're looking for alternatives to generate unique identifiers, here are a few options:

1. **`uuid.v4()`**: Another widely used library for generating UUIDs.
2. **`Math.random()` and `Date.now()`**: Simple, non-uuid-based approaches that might not be as efficient or reliable.
3. **System-specific APIs**: Depending on the platform, there might be system-specific APIs for generating unique identifiers.

Keep in mind that these alternatives might have different trade-offs in terms of performance, security, and complexity.

lodash-uuid vs crypto.randomUUID (version: 0) Benchmark.js

Comparing performance of: `randomUUID vs lodashUUID`

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

randomUUID

lodashUUID

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 11 community runs

Desktop 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):

lodash-uuid vs crypto.randomUUID (version: 0) Benchmark.js

Comparing performance of: randomUUID vs lodashUUID

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

randomUUID

lodashUUID

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 11 community runs

Desktop 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: `randomUUID vs lodashUUID`