Benchmark: Array vs TypedArray write performance %%%%%%%%%%%%

Script Preparation code:

var array = new Array(100000).fill(0).map(_x => 0);
var typedArray = new Uint32Array(100000).fill(0);

Tests:

Array write
for (let i=0; i<array.length; i++) { array[i] = array[i] + 1; }
TypedArray write
for (let i=0; i<typedArray.length; i++) { typedArray[i] = typedArray[i] + 1; }

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 13 community runs

Desktop Results:

Firefox 13 runs

TypedArray write

22K/s

Array write

11K/s

Fastest: TypedArray write (2.0x faster)

View exact numbers

✓ TypedArray write: 22,253 ops/sec
• Array write: 11,135 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
Array write
TypedArray write

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 8 days ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:152.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/152.0

Browser/OS: Firefox 152 on Linux

View result in a separate tab

TypedArray write

23K/s

Array write

11K/s

View exact numbers

Test name	Executions per second
✓ TypedArray write	23,496 Ops/sec
Array write	11,153 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

The benchmark defined in this JSON evaluates the performance of traditional JavaScript arrays against typed arrays, specifically the `Uint32Array`, in terms of write operations. This performance comparison focuses on how quickly values can be updated within each of these two data structures through iteration.

### Options Compared:
1. **Array Write**: This test case updates each element in a standard JavaScript array, using the following code:
   ```javascript
   for (let i = 0; i < array.length; i++) {
       array[i] = array[i] + 1;
   }
   ```
   
2. **TypedArray Write**: This test case updates each element in a `Uint32Array`, using similar looping logic:
   ```javascript
   for (let i = 0; i < typedArray.length; i++) {
       typedArray[i] = typedArray[i] + 1;
   }
   ```

### Pros and Cons of Each Approach:

#### Array:
- **Pros**:
  - Simplicity: Regular arrays are more flexible and adaptable as they can hold different types of data (mixed types).
  - Ease of use: Standard arrays are part of the core JavaScript language and are generally straightforward to work with.
  
- **Cons**:
  - Performance: As indicated by the benchmark results, typical arrays are slower for numerical operations. The performance drop can be significant, especially in computationally intensive scenarios.

#### TypedArray:
- **Pros**:
  - Performance Optimization: Typed arrays, such as `Uint32Array`, are designed for high-performance applications where fast numerical processing is critical. They provide better performance due to optimized memory usage and lower overhead.
  - Type Safety: Typed arrays only allow numeric types, which can lead to reduced memory consumption and improved performance in scenarios involving large datasets.

- **Cons**:
  - Less Flexibility: Typed arrays only store numerical data (of a specific type), limiting the kinds of operations you can perform compared to regular arrays.
  - Compatibility: Older browsers may not support typed arrays, so developers need to consider the environment in which their code will run.

### Considerations:
1. **Use Case**: When to use a standard array versus a typed array depends on the specific requirements of the application. For applications heavily focused on numeric calculations, typed arrays are often the better choice. For mixed content or simpler tasks, regular arrays might suffice.
  
2. **Browser Support**: Though modern browsers support typed arrays, developers should ensure compatibility with their user base if they are targeting older environments.

### Alternatives:
Other alternatives to consider when working with array-like structures in JavaScript include:
- **Other Typed Arrays**: Other types of typed arrays, such as `Int32Array`, `Float32Array`, etc., depending on the specific numerical type needs.
- **Performance Libraries**: Libraries like `math.js` or `numeric.js` can offer optimized mathematical functions and support for matrices, which might prove beneficial in specific contexts.
- **Data Structures**: For complex data manipulations, consider using libraries such as `Immutable.js` that provide persistent and optimized data structures.

In conclusion, this benchmark offers valuable insights into the performance discrepancies between basic arrays and typed arrays when executing numerical operations in JavaScript. Understanding the nuances of these differences is crucial for developers aiming to optimize applications effectively.

Array vs TypedArray write performance %%%%%%%%%%%% (version: 1)

Comparing performance of: `Array write vs TypedArray write`

Created: one year ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

Array write

TypedArray write

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 13 community runs

Desktop Results:

Firefox 13 runs

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

Array vs TypedArray write performance %%%%%%%%%%%% (version: 1)

Comparing performance of: Array write vs TypedArray write

Created: one year ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

Array write

TypedArray write

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 13 community runs

Desktop Results:

Firefox 13 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: `Array write vs TypedArray write`