Toggle navigation
MeasureThat
.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
Math.random vs crypto.getRandomValues (reverse order)
(version: 0)
Fast and quick test
Comparing performance of:
crypto API vs Math.random
Created:
2 years ago
by:
Guest
Go to the latest result
Tests:
crypto API
crypto.getRandomValues(new Uint8Array(1))
Math.random
Math.random()
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
crypto API
Math.random
Fastest:
N/A
Slowest:
N/A
Latest run results:
Run details:
(Test run date:
2 years ago
)
User agent:
Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; Android 10; K) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/120.0.0.0 Mobile Safari/537.36
Browser/OS:
Chrome Mobile 120 on Android
View result in a separate tab
Embed
Embed Benchmark Result
<iframe src="https://measurethat.net/Embed?id=494041" width="100%" height="500px"></iframe>
Math.random
5.3M/s
crypto API
111K/s
View exact numbers
Test name
Executions per second
✓
Math.random
5,316,988 Ops/sec
crypto API
110,876 Ops/sec
Autogenerated LLM Summary
(model
llama3.2:3b
, generated one year ago):
Let's dive into the world of JavaScript microbenchmarks! The provided JSON represents two individual test cases for measuring the performance of `Math.random()` and the `crypto.getRandomValues()` function. **What is being tested?** Two separate benchmarks are being compared: 1. **`Math.random()`**: This function generates a random number between 0 (inclusive) and 1 (exclusive). The benchmark measures how fast this function can generate numbers. 2. **`crypto.getRandomValues(new Uint8Array(1))`**: This function generates a cryptographically secure random byte. It's designed to provide stronger randomness than `Math.random()`. **Options compared:** The two functions are being measured in their native implementations, with no additional optimizations or tweaks applied. **Pros and Cons of the approaches:** * **`Math.random()`**: + Pros: Simple to implement, widely supported by most browsers. + Cons: Not designed for security-critical applications; can be predictable (e.g., using a fixed seed). * **`crypto.getRandomValues()`**: + Pros: Designed for security-critical applications, provides stronger randomness. + Cons: More complex to implement, may have performance overhead due to the underlying cryptographically secure algorithm. **Other considerations:** * Both functions use different algorithms to generate random numbers. `Math.random()` uses a pseudo-random number generator (PRNG), while `crypto.getRandomValues()` uses the AES-CBC-PKCS7-plain block cipher and SHA-256 hash function. * The `crypto.getRandomValues()` implementation is designed to be cryptographically secure, making it suitable for generating secrets or non-repeating numbers. **Library and purpose:** The `crypto` library is a built-in JavaScript module that provides cryptographic functions. In this benchmark, the `getRandomValues()` method is used to generate a random byte array. There are no special JavaScript features or syntax used in these benchmarks. **Other alternatives:** If you need stronger randomness than what `Math.random()` provides, you can consider using other libraries or modules, such as: * `webcrypto`: A newer API for cryptography and random number generation in browsers. * `random-bit` or `random-filler`: Third-party libraries that provide cryptographically secure random numbers. Keep in mind that these alternatives might have performance overhead or additional dependencies.
Related benchmarks
repeated Math.random() vs crypto.getRandomValues()
Math.random vs crypto.getRandom Alberto
crypto.getRandomValues vs Math.random()
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?