Benchmark: Array Intersection, big and small

HTML Preparation code:

<script src='https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/lodash.js/4.17.5/lodash.min.js'></script>

Script Preparation code:

var small = [...Array(100)].map(it => ~~(Math.random() * 1000));
var big = [...Array(1000)].map(it => ~~(Math.random() * 1000));

Tests:

big.filter(small.includes)
big.filter(x => small.includes(x))
small.filter(big.includes)
small.filter(x => big.includes(x))
Set intersection
[...new Set(big).intersection(new Set(small))]

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
big.filter(small.includes)
small.filter(big.includes)
Set intersection

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 18_1_1 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/605.1.15 (KHTML, like Gecko) CriOS/131.0.6778.73 Mobile/15E148 Safari/604.1

Browser/OS: Chrome Mobile iOS 131 on iOS 18.1.1

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
big.filter(small.includes)	16221.9 Ops/sec
small.filter(big.includes)	26554.5 Ops/sec
Set intersection	66366.3 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

Array Intersection, big and small (version: 1)

Comparing performance of: big.filter(small.includes) vs small.filter(big.includes) vs Set intersection

Created: one year ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

big.filter(small.includes)

small.filter(big.includes)

Set intersection

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A