Toggle navigation
MeasureThat
.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
Feature Requests
FAQ
Register
Log In
math.pow vs multiply
(version: 0)
Benchmark.js
math.pow vs multiply
Comparing performance of:
Math.pow vs power
Created:
2 years ago
by:
Guest
Go to the latest result
Tests:
Math.pow
var distance = Math.pow(12-6,2) + Math.pow(57-32, 2) + Math.pow(86-12,2)
power
var distance = (12-6)*(12-6) + (57-32)*(57-32) + (86-12)*(86-12)
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
Math.pow
power
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/122.0.0.0 Safari/537.36
Browser/OS:
Chrome 122 on Mac OS X 10.15.7
View result in a separate tab
Embed
Embed Benchmark Result
<iframe src="https://measurethat.net/Embed?id=512125" width="100%" height="500px"></iframe>
power
110.1M/s
Math.pow
3.7M/s
View exact numbers
Test name
Executions per second
✓
power
110,124,800 Ops/sec
Math.pow
3,682,262 Ops/sec
Autogenerated LLM Summary
(model
llama3.2:3b
, generated one year ago):
Let's break down the benchmark and explain what's being tested. **Benchmark Purpose** The benchmark is designed to compare the performance of two approaches: using `Math.pow` and using the multiplication operator (`*`) to calculate the square of a number, in this case, calculating the distance between coordinates (12, 6), (57, 32), and (86, 12). **Approaches Compared** The two approaches being compared are: 1. **Using `Math.pow`**: This method uses the built-in `pow()` function to calculate the square of a number. 2. **Using multiplication operator (`*`)**: This approach multiplies each coordinate by itself to calculate its square. **Pros and Cons** **Using `Math.pow`** Pros: * Concise and readable code * Built-in function for exponentiation, reducing boilerplate code Cons: * May incur a small overhead due to the presence of a built-in function * Could potentially be optimized further by the JavaScript engine or interpreter **Using multiplication operator (`*`)** Pros: * Efficient and straightforward implementation * Avoids potential overhead of a built-in function Cons: * Code may appear more verbose and less readable, especially for complex calculations * May require additional checks to ensure correct operation (e.g., avoiding NaN values) **Library Used** In this benchmark, the `Math` library is used, which provides various mathematical functions, including `pow()`. The `Math.pow()` function takes two arguments: the base and the exponent. In this case, it's used to calculate the square of a number. **Special JS Feature or Syntax** This benchmark does not explicitly use any special JavaScript features or syntax beyond what's commonly available in modern JavaScript implementations. **Other Alternatives** Alternative approaches for calculating squares could include: * Using bit shifting (e.g., `x * x` using bitwise operations) * Using modular arithmetic (e.g., `(a + b) % 2 == 0` to check if a number is even) * Implementing custom exponentiation algorithms, such as the "exponentiation by squaring" method These alternatives might offer trade-offs in terms of readability, performance, and complexity. **Benchmark Preparation Code** The `Script Preparation Code` and `Html Preparation Code` fields are empty, indicating that no additional setup or preparation is required for this benchmark.
Related benchmarks
math pow vs multiply vs multiply2
Math.pow vs Exponentiation vs Multiplication
multiplication vs exponentiation
Math.pow vs Exponentiation vs Multiplication pow 4
math.pow vs multiply vs exponentiation
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?