Toggle navigation
MeasureThat
.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
Check Date contains time
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
getTime vs getHours/Minutes/Seconds vs setHours
Created:
one year ago
by:
Guest
Go to the latest result
Script Preparation code:
var d = new Date('2024-05-05')
Tests:
getTime
const time = d.getTime(); time % 10000 === 0 && time % 600000 === 0 && time % 36000000 === 0
getHours/Minutes/Seconds
d.getHours() === 0 && d.getMinutes() === 0 && d.getSeconds() === 0
setHours
d.getTime() === d.setHours(0,0,0,0)
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (3)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
getTime
getHours/Minutes/Seconds
setHours
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; rv:129.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/129.0
Browser/OS:
Firefox 129 on Windows
View result in a separate tab
Embed
Embed Benchmark Result
<iframe src="https://measurethat.net/Embed?id=539410" width="100%" height="500px"></iframe>
getHours/Minutes/Seconds
41.3M/s
getTime
23.4M/s
setHours
9.5M/s
View exact numbers
Test name
Executions per second
✓
getHours/Minutes/Seconds
41,322,156 Ops/sec
getTime
23,361,738 Ops/sec
setHours
9,460,113 Ops/sec
Autogenerated LLM Summary
(model
llama3.2:3b
, generated one year ago):
I'll break down the provided JSON data for you. **Benchmark Definition** The benchmark definition represents a test case to measure the performance of getting hours, minutes, and seconds from a Date object in JavaScript. The script preparation code creates a new Date object with a specific date and time (2024-05-05). The HTML preparation code is empty, which means no additional HTML setup is required. **Options Compared** In this benchmark, three options are compared: 1. `getTime()`: Retrieves the timestamp of the Date object in milliseconds. 2. `getHours()`, `getMinutes()`, and `getSeconds()`: Accesses individual components of the Date object's time. **Pros and Cons of Each Approach** 1. `getTime()`: * Pros: Simple, efficient, and accurate way to get the timestamp. * Cons: Returns milliseconds, which might not be what you want if you need seconds or minutes. Also, it doesn't take into account timezone differences. 2. `getHours()`, `getMinutes()`, and `getSeconds()`: * Pros: Provides more granular access to individual time components, which can be useful in certain scenarios. * Cons: More complex and potentially slower due to the multiple operations. **Library Used** None, as this benchmark uses native JavaScript APIs (Date object). **Special JS Features/Syntax** The `getTime()` method is an example of a built-in JavaScript function. No special features or syntax are required for this test case. Now, let's analyze the individual test cases: 1. `getTime`: * This test checks if the timestamp retrieved using `getTime()` matches specific conditions (every 10 seconds, every 6 minutes, and every 36 hours). The exact logic might vary depending on the implementation. 2. `getHours/Minutes/Seconds`: * This test verifies that accessing individual time components returns the correct values for the specified date and time. 3. `setHours`: * This test checks if setting the hour, minute, second, and millisecond of the Date object to 0 results in a timestamp matching the original set timestamp. **Other Alternatives** To measure performance or implement similar tests, you could consider using other JavaScript APIs or libraries, such as: 1. `Intl.DateTimeFormat` for formatting dates and times. 2. `moment.js` or other date and time libraries that provide more complex features and optimizations. 3. Custom implementations using bitwise operations or other low-level techniques. Keep in mind that the choice of library or implementation depends on your specific use case, performance requirements, and personal preference.
Related benchmarks
Creating date objects
Creating Date objects 350 vs 9000
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?