cached Intl.NumberFormat vs new Intl.NumberFormat vs toLocaleString currency loop (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: cached Intl.NumberFormat vs new Intl.NumberFormat vs toLocaleString

Created: one year ago by: Guest
Go to the latest result
Tests:

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 70 community runs

Desktop Results:
Chrome 48 runs
cached Intl.NumberFormat
47K/s
toLocaleString
850/s
new Intl.NumberFormat
841/s

Fastest: cached Intl.NumberFormat (55.6x faster)

View exact numbers
  • ✓ cached Intl.NumberFormat: 46,727 ops/sec
  • • toLocaleString: 850 ops/sec
  • • new Intl.NumberFormat: 841 ops/sec
Firefox 22 runs
cached Intl.NumberFormat
36K/s
toLocaleString
806/s
new Intl.NumberFormat
773/s

Fastest: cached Intl.NumberFormat (46.8x faster)

View exact numbers
  • ✓ cached Intl.NumberFormat: 36,214 ops/sec
  • • toLocaleString: 806 ops/sec
  • • new Intl.NumberFormat: 773 ops/sec

Results show median performance across all community submissions. Run this benchmark yourself to verify on your device.

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results
  • Test case name Result
    cached Intl.NumberFormat
    new Intl.NumberFormat
    toLocaleString

    Fastest: N/A

    Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:
Run details: (Test run date: 3 minutes ago)
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/151.0.0.0 Safari/537.36
Chrome 151 on Linux
View result in a separate tab
cached Intl.NumberFormat
41K/s
toLocaleString
891/s
new Intl.NumberFormat
853/s
View exact numbers
Test name Executions per second
✓ cached Intl.NumberFormat 40,622 Ops/sec
toLocaleString 891 Ops/sec
new Intl.NumberFormat 853 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks