Toggle navigation
MeasureThat
.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
Powers of 2
(version: 1)
Comparing performance of:
1024 to 0 vs 1
Created:
one year ago
by:
Guest
Go to the latest result
Tests:
1024 to 0
Math.pow(1024, 0)
1
1
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
1024 to 0
1
Fastest:
N/A
Slowest:
N/A
Latest run results:
Run details:
(Test run date:
one year ago
)
User agent:
Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/130.0.0.0 Safari/537.36
Browser/OS:
Chrome 130 on Mac OS X 10.15.7
View result in a separate tab
Embed
Embed Benchmark Result
<iframe src="https://measurethat.net/Embed?id=568265" width="100%" height="500px"></iframe>
1
192.7M/s
1024 to 0
20.9M/s
View exact numbers
Test name
Executions per second
✓
1
192,681,632 Ops/sec
1024 to 0
20,905,800 Ops/sec
Autogenerated LLM Summary
(model
gpt-4o-mini
, generated one year ago):
The benchmark defined here is focused on comparing two different ways of calculating powers using JavaScript, specifically using the built-in `Math.pow` function and a constant value. The tests are centered around computing `1024` raised to the power of `0` against simply returning `1`. ### Options Compared 1. **Math.pow(1024, 0)**: - **Test Name**: "1024 to 0" - **Explanation**: This test evaluates the performance of the `Math.pow` function, specifically calculating `1024^0`. According to the mathematical rules, anything raised to the power of `0` equals `1`. However, using `Math.pow` involves a function call which can introduce overhead. 2. **1**: - **Test Name**: "1" - **Explanation**: This test directly returns the constant `1`. This is an efficient operation since it doesn't involve computing anything—it's simply a literal value. ### Pros and Cons of Each Approach #### Using Math.pow(1024, 0) - **Pros**: - Can handle larger exponentiation tasks dynamically. - Use it for any numeric calculation that requires power, which is beneficial for operations that need varying bases and exponents. - **Cons**: - Introduces function call overhead, making it slower for constant values such as `1`. - Complexity in function execution is higher compared to returning a literal, leading to reduced performance in tightly looped contexts or high-volume computations. #### Using 1 - **Pros**: - Returns a constant value directly, resulting in optimal performance. - Zero overhead associated with function calls—an extremely fast operation. - **Cons**: - Only suitable for cases where the result is known and constant. - Lack of flexibility for dynamic calculations as in `Math.pow`. ### Other Considerations - **Performance Metrics**: In the results, we see significantly higher execution rates for returning `1` (approximately 192 million executions per second) compared to the `Math.pow(1024, 0)` test (approximately 21 million executions per second). This stark difference illustrates the overhead introduced by function calls in JavaScript. - **Use Cases**: While the `Math.pow` function is useful in many mathematical operations, if you're just looking to return a constant that has a determined value, it's more efficient to return the constant directly. ### Alternatives - **Exponentiation Operator**: For modern JavaScript (ES6 and onwards), the exponentiation operator `**` can be used as an alternative to `Math.pow`, e.g., `1024 ** 0`. However, since this operator also relies on function-like behavior for other values, its performance competitive with returning the constant would likely be similar to `Math.pow`. - **Pre-Computation & Caching**: For scenarios where the same powers are computed repetitively, pre-computing results or using a caching mechanism can save computation time. - **Use of Libraries**: While not necessary for this case specifically, libraries like `math.js` provide a rich API for various mathematical functions, including more complex operations but would also introduce some overhead. In summary, this benchmark illustrates a fundamental aspect of performance in JavaScript regarding the trade-off between flexibility (with function calls) and speed (with direct values). As a best practice, if you know the outcome beforehand, always prefer returning a constant over utilizing a function call for improved performance.
Related benchmarks
Math pow and double asterix
Math pow and double asterisk with floats
Math.pow performance
math pow 0 vs pow 2
math pow of 0 vs pow of 54
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?