Benchmark: Date.parse vs new Date()

Tests:

new Date
new Date();
Date.parse
Date.parse('Next-Day Delivery <br> Arrives tomorrow, Wednesday Oct. 27');

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
new Date
Date.parse

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 2 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/123.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 123 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
new Date	3691909.2 Ops/sec
Date.parse	1149636.4 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

I'd be happy to help explain the benchmark.

**What is being tested?**

The provided benchmark measures the performance difference between two JavaScript methods: `new Date()` and `Date.parse()`. The goal is to determine which method is faster, more efficient, or has better performance characteristics.

**Options compared**

Two options are compared:

1. **`new Date()`**: This method creates a new date object using the current timestamp.
2. **`Date.parse()`**: This method parses a string representing a date and returns a number corresponding to that date.

**Pros and cons of each approach:**

*   `new Date()`: 
    *   Pros:
        *   Simple and straightforward way to create a new date object.
        *   No external dependencies or libraries required.
    *   Cons:
        *   May be slower than `Date.parse()` due to the overhead of creating a new object.
*   `Date.parse()`:
    *   Pros:
        *   Can parse complex date strings and is more flexible than `new Date()`.
        *   Often faster than `new Date()` because it doesn't require creating an object.
    *   Cons:
        *   May be less intuitive or straightforward to use compared to `new Date()`, especially for parsing simple dates.

**Library usage**

The benchmark uses the built-in JavaScript `Date` object and its methods, specifically `new Date()` and `Date.parse()`. No external libraries are required.

**Special JS feature or syntax**

There is no special JavaScript feature or syntax used in this benchmark. The test cases only involve basic JavaScript syntax for creating a new date object and parsing a string representation of a date.

**Other alternatives**

If you wanted to test alternative approaches, some possible options could include:

*   **`Date.now()`**: This method returns the number of milliseconds since the Unix epoch (January 1, 1970). It's often used as a more lightweight alternative to `new Date()`.
*   **`Intl.DateTimeFormat`**: This API allows you to parse and format dates in different formats. Using this approach could provide insights into date parsing performance in specific contexts.
*   **Custom implementation**: You could also implement your own custom function for creating or parsing dates, which would help identify the strengths and weaknesses of a particular approach.

Keep in mind that the choice of alternative approaches will depend on the specific requirements and goals of your benchmark.

Related benchmarks:

Date.parse vs new Date() (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: new Date vs Date.parse

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

new Date

Date.parse

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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