Benchmark: DataView vs Uint32Array find

Script Preparation code:

var size = 1048576;
var buf = new ArrayBuffer(size);
var view = new DataView(buf);
var u32view = new Uint32Array(buf);

var data = [];

for (let i = 0; i < u32view.length; i++) {
	u32view[i] = 10000*Math.random();
}

Tests:

DataView
for (let i = 0; i < buf.byteLength; i += 4) { if (view.getUint32(i, true) == 0x48384992) console.log('found'); }
Uint32Array
for (let i = 0; i < u32view.length; ++i) { if (view[i] == 0x48384992) console.log('found'); }

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 5 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 5 runs

DataView

444/s

Uint32Array

251/s

Fastest: DataView (1.8x faster)

View exact numbers

✓ DataView: 444 ops/sec
• Uint32Array: 251 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
DataView
Uint32Array

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: one year ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/128.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 128 on Linux

View result in a separate tab

DataView

758/s

Uint32Array

377/s

View exact numbers

Test name	Executions per second
✓ DataView	758 Ops/sec
Uint32Array	377 Ops/sec

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model gpt-4o-mini, generated one year ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

The benchmark defined by the provided JSON file is focused on comparing two different methods for accessing and searching through data stored in a typed array: `DataView` and `Uint32Array`. Here’s an overview of what is tested, the options being compared, their pros and cons, and some additional considerations.

### What is Tested

1. **DataView Method**:
   - The benchmark runs a loop where it uses `DataView` to get a 32-bit unsigned integer from an ArrayBuffer. It checks if that integer equals a specific value (`0x48384992`).
   - **Code**:
     ```javascript
     for (let i = 0; i < buf.byteLength; i += 4) {
       if (view.getUint32(i, true) == 0x48384992)
         console.log('found');
     }
     ```

2. **Uint32Array Method**:
   - In this approach, it accesses the data directly through a `Uint32Array` view of the same buffer. The benchmark checks each value in the array for the same integer.
   - **Code**:
     ```javascript
     for (let i = 0; i < u32view.length; ++i) {
       if (u32view[i] == 0x48384992)
         console.log('found');
     }
     ```

### Options Compared

- **DataView**:
  - **Pros**:
    - Provides flexibility in reading and writing different types of data from the buffer (e.g., 8-bit, 16-bit, 32-bit integers, floats).
    - Allows for mixed-endian data access, which can be beneficial for certain applications.
  - **Cons**:
    - Generally slower than typed arrays for simple data access due to the overhead of the `getUint32()` method.
    - More verbose and complex syntax.

- **Uint32Array**:
  - **Pros**:
    - Generally faster and more efficient for accessing numerical data as it directly maps data into an array structure designed for that type.
    - Simpler and cleaner syntax for iterating through the data.
  - **Cons**:
    - Lacks the flexibility of `DataView` for handling different data types in the same buffer.
    - Less suitable for applications that require mixed data types or specific byte-ordering manipulations.

### Additional Considerations

- **Usage Context**: The choice between `DataView` and `Uint32Array` depends on the specific needs of the application. If performance is critical and only numerical data is involved, `Uint32Array` is usually preferred. If the application needs to handle various data formats or requires specific endian-ness, `DataView` is more suitable.
  
- **Benchmarking Results**: In this benchmark's results, `DataView` executed approximately 20.86 operations per second while `Uint32Array` executed about 19.91 operations per second. Although both methods performed similarly, the `DataView` approach was slightly faster in this specific scenario.

### Alternatives

Other alternatives include:

- **Typed Arrays**: Besides `Uint32Array`, there are various typed arrays available in JavaScript, such as `Int32Array`, `Float32Array`, etc. They can provide better performance for specific data types.
  
- **ArrayBuffer**: Direct manipulations using `ArrayBuffer` without `DataView` and typed arrays might be of use, albeit with more complexity and less safety, since you would need to handle byte representation manually.

- **Plain Arrays**: Depending on the scenario, regular JavaScript arrays (`Array` type) can be used for more dynamic types but come with the performance overhead and limitations associated with them.

In summary, while `DataView` and `Uint32Array` serve distinct needs in data handling within JavaScript, `Uint32Array` is typically favored for its performance advantages when dealing with homogeneous numeric data.

DataView vs Uint32Array find (version: 1)

Comparing performance of: `DataView vs Uint32Array`

Created: one year ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

DataView

Uint32Array

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 5 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 5 runs

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model gpt-4o-mini, generated one year ago):

DataView vs Uint32Array find (version: 1)

Comparing performance of: DataView vs Uint32Array

Created: one year ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

DataView

Uint32Array

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 5 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 5 runs

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model gpt-4o-mini, generated one year ago):

Related benchmarks

Comparing performance of: `DataView vs Uint32Array`