Benchmark: Math.min vs if/else vs ternary operator test 3

Script Preparation code:

this.numberA = Math.random() * 1000;
this.numberB = Math.random() * 1000;
this.numberC = Math.random() * 1000;

Tests:

Math.min
return Math.min(this.numberA, this.numberB, this.numberC);
if
if (this.numberA < this.numberB) { if (this.numberA < this.numberC) { return this.numberA; }else{ return this.numberC; } }else{ if (this.numberB < this.numberC) { return this.numberB }else{ return this.numberC; } }
ternary
return (this.numberA < this.numberB) ? (this.numberA < this.numberC ? this.numberA : this.numberC) : ( this.numberB < this.numberC ? this.numberB : this.numberC)

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Math.min
if
ternary

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: one year ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/133.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 133 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Math.min

17.3M/s

ternary

9.0M/s

8.7M/s

View exact numbers

Test name	Executions per second
✓ Math.min	17,314,072 Ops/sec
ternary	8,974,568 Ops/sec
if	8,737,301 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 provided benchmark and its test cases.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark measures which operation is the quickest to return the smaller of two numbers: `this.numberA` and `this.numberB`. The results are compared across three approaches:

1. **Math.min**: Using the built-in `Math.min()` function.
2. **if/else**: Implementing a conditional statement to determine the smaller number.
3. **Ternary Operator**: Using a ternary operator (a single expression that evaluates to a value) to concisely return the smaller number.

**Options Comparison**

*   **Pros and Cons of each approach:**
    *   **Math.min**: Pros:
        *   Easy to read and write.
        *   Built-in function, so no additional dependencies are required.
        Cons:
        *   May incur overhead due to the function call itself.
    *   **if/else**: Pros:
        *   Can be customized for specific use cases.
        Cons:
        *   More verbose than ternary operator or Math.min.
    *   **Ternary Operator**: Pros:
        *   Concise and easy to read.
        *   No additional function call overhead.
    Cons:
        *   May require parentheses to ensure correct order of operations.

**Library Usage**

There is no library usage in this benchmark. The `Math.min()` function is a built-in JavaScript function, and the conditional statement in the "if" test case does not use any external libraries.

**Special JS Feature/Syntax**

The only special feature used in this benchmark is the ternary operator (also known as the conditional operator), which is a shorthand way to write simple if-else statements. The syntax for the ternary operator is: `condition ? value_if_true : value_if_false`.

Let's examine each test case:

1.  **Math.min**:
    *   This test case uses the built-in `Math.min()` function.
    *   It returns the smaller of `this.numberA`, `this.numberB`, and `this.numberC` directly.
2.  **if/else**:
    *   This test case implements a nested if-else statement to find the smallest number.
    *   If `this.numberA` is less than `this.numberB`, it further checks `this.numberA` against `this.numberC`. Otherwise, it compares `this.numberB` with `this.numberC`.
3.  **ternary**:
    *   This test case uses the ternary operator to concisely return the smaller number.
    *   It first evaluates the condition `(this.numberA < this.numberB)`, and if true, it further checks `(this.numberA < this.numberC)` before returning `this.numberA`. If the condition is false, it compares `(this.numberB < this.numberC)` and returns `this.numberB` if true or `this.numberC` if false.

**Other Alternatives**

Some alternative approaches to implementing this benchmark could include:

*   **Binary search**: Instead of directly comparing numbers, you can use binary search to find the smallest number. This approach would have a time complexity of O(log n), making it more efficient for larger inputs.
*   **Array operations**: You can also measure which operation is faster when dealing with arrays of numbers. This could involve creating an array of random numbers and measuring the execution time of different operations (e.g., Math.min(), if/else, ternary operator) applied to each element in the array.

These alternative approaches would require changes to the benchmark definition and test cases but could provide valuable insights into performance optimization techniques.

Math.min vs if/else vs ternary operator test 3 (version: 0)

Quickest operation to return smaller of 2 numbers

Comparing performance of: `Math.min vs if vs ternary`

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

Math.min

if

ternary

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

Math.min vs if/else vs ternary operator test 3 (version: 0)

Quickest operation to return smaller of 2 numbers

Comparing performance of: Math.min vs if vs ternary

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

Math.min

if

ternary

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: `Math.min vs if vs ternary`