Benchmark: Finding the max value of a property in an array of objects

Script Preparation code:

var array = [];
for (var i = 0; i < 10000; i++) {
    array.push({
        value: Math.random() * 1000000,
    });
}

Tests:

1
var max = Math.max.apply(Math, array.map(x => x.value));
2
var max = Math.max(...array.map(x => x.value))
3
var max = array.reduce((prev, current) => (prev && prev.value > current.value) ? prev : current).value;

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
1
2
3

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/126.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 126 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

20K/s

6K/s

View exact numbers

Test name	Executions per second
✓ 3	19,647 Ops/sec
2	6,394 Ops/sec
1	5,964 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 benchmark and explain what's being tested.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark is designed to measure how fast different approaches can find the maximum value of a property in an array of objects.

**Options Compared**

There are three options compared:

1. **`Math.max.apply(Math, array.map(x => x.value))`**: This method uses the `map()` function to create a new array with the values of each object's property, and then applies the `Math.max()` function to find the maximum value.
2. **`Math.max(...array.map(x => x.value))`**: This method is similar to the previous one, but it uses the spread operator (`...`) to pass the mapped array as separate arguments to the `Math.max()` function.
3. **`array.reduce((prev, current) => (prev && prev.value > current.value) ? prev : current).value`**: This method uses the `reduce()` function to iterate over the array and find the maximum value.

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

1. **`Math.max.apply(Math, array.map(x => x.value))`**:
	* Pros: Simple and readable syntax.
	* Cons: Creates a new array with the mapped values, which can be memory-intensive for large datasets.
2. **`Math.max(...array.map(x => x.value))`**:
	* Pros: More concise syntax than `apply()`, and avoids creating a new array.
	* Cons: Requires support for the spread operator in older browsers or environments.
3. **`array.reduce((prev, current) => (prev && prev.value > current.value) ? prev : current).value`**:
	* Pros: More efficient use of memory, as it only processes each element once.
	* Cons: Less readable syntax compared to the other two options.

**Library and Purpose**

In none of these examples is a specific library used. However, `Math.max()` is a built-in JavaScript function that can be used for this purpose.

**Special JS Features or Syntax**

The benchmark uses the following features:

1. **Arrow functions**: Used in options 2 and 3 to define concise functions.
2. **Spread operator (`...`)**: Used in option 2 to pass the mapped array as separate arguments to `Math.max()`.
3. **Reduce method**: Used in option 3 to find the maximum value in the array.

**Other Alternatives**

If you're looking for alternative approaches, here are a few:

1. **`array.forEach()` + `Math.max()`**: Iterate over the array using `forEach()` and call `Math.max()` on each element.
2. **`map()`, then `reduce()`**: Create a new array with the mapped values, and then use `reduce()` to find the maximum value.

Keep in mind that these alternatives may have different performance characteristics or trade-offs compared to the original options.

Finding the max value of a property in an array of objects (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: `1 vs 2 vs 3`

Created: 2 years ago by: Registered User

Go to the latest result

1

2

3

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

Finding the max value of a property in an array of objects (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: 1 vs 2 vs 3

Created: 2 years ago by: Registered User

Go to the latest result

1

2

3

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: `1 vs 2 vs 3`