Benchmark: date-fns subMilli new Date() vs date.now

HTML Preparation code:

<script src="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/date-fns/1.30.1/date_fns.min.js"></script>

Tests:

newDate
dateFns.subMilliseconds(new Date(), 10000)
dateNew
dateFns.subMilliseconds(Date.now(), 10000)

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
newDate
dateNew

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/120.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 120 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
newDate	4484462.0 Ops/sec
dateNew	4933679.5 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's dive into explaining the benchmark and its various components.

**What is tested on MeasureThat.net?**

MeasureThat.net is a website that allows users to create and run JavaScript microbenchmarks. In this case, we're testing two approaches for measuring time intervals using the `date-fns` library: `new Date()` vs `date.now`.

**Options compared**

There are two options being compared:

1. **Using `new Date()`:** This method creates a new `Date` object and returns its timestamp in milliseconds. It's a more explicit approach, but may incur additional overhead due to the creation of a new object.
2. **Using `date.now():`** This method directly returns the current timestamp in milliseconds. It's a more concise and lightweight approach.

**Pros and cons**

Here are some pros and cons of each approach:

* **Using `new Date()`:**
	+ Pros:
		- More explicit control over timing
		- Can be used for specific use cases where precision is required
	+ Cons:
		- May incur additional overhead due to object creation
		- Less concise than using `date.now()`
* **Using `date.now():`**
	+ Pros:
		- More concise and lightweight
		- Faster execution
	+ Cons:
		- Less explicit control over timing

**Library: date-fns**

The `date-fns` library is a popular JavaScript library for working with dates. It provides a set of utility functions for formatting, parsing, and manipulating dates. In this benchmark, it's used to create the `subMilliseconds()` function, which subtracts a specified number of milliseconds from the current timestamp.

**Special JS feature/syntax**

There doesn't seem to be any special JavaScript features or syntax being tested in this benchmark. The focus is on comparing two approaches to measuring time intervals using the `date-fns` library.

**Other alternatives**

If you're interested in exploring other options for measuring time intervals, here are a few alternatives:

1. **`Date.now()` without `date-fns`:** You can use `Date.now()` directly without any libraries.
2. **Other timing functions:** There are other timing functions available in JavaScript, such as `performance.now()` (which is part of the Web APIs) or `setTimeout()` and `clearTimeout()`.
3. **Benchmarking frameworks:** If you're interested in creating more complex benchmarks, there are several benchmarking frameworks available for JavaScript, such as ` benchmark.js` or `jsbench`.

I hope this explanation helps!

Related benchmarks:

date-fns subMilli new Date() vs date.now (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: newDate vs dateNew

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

newDate

dateNew

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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