Benchmark: DateTimeFormat vs toLocaleString2

HTML Preparation code:

<!--your preparation HTML code goes here-->

Script Preparation code:

/*your preparation JavaScript code goes here */
var options = {
  year: 'numeric', month: 'numeric', day: 'numeric',
  hour: 'numeric', minute: 'numeric', second: 'numeric',
  hour12: false,
  fractionalSecondDigits: 3,
}
var formatter = new Intl.DateTimeFormat('de-DE', options)

Tests:

DateTimeFormat single
formatter.format(new Date())
toLocaleString single
new Date().toLocaleString('de-DE', options)
DateTimeFormat 100
[...Array(100)].forEach((_, i) => formatter.format(new Date()))
toLocaleString 100
[...Array(100)].forEach((_, i) => new Date().toLocaleString('de-DE', options))
DateTimeFormat 10000
[...Array(10000)].forEach((_, i) => formatter.format(new Date()))
toLocaleString 10000
[...Array(10000)].forEach((_, i) => new Date().toLocaleString('de-DE', options))

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
DateTimeFormat single
toLocaleString single
DateTimeFormat 100
toLocaleString 100
DateTimeFormat 10000
toLocaleString 10000

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/131.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 131 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

DateTimeFormat single

746K/s

toLocaleString single

27K/s

DateTimeFormat 100

8K/s

toLocaleString 100

270/s

DateTimeFormat 10000

75/s

toLocaleString 10000

3/s

View exact numbers

Test name	Executions per second
✓ DateTimeFormat single	745,970 Ops/sec
toLocaleString single	27,342 Ops/sec
DateTimeFormat 100	7,513 Ops/sec
toLocaleString 100	270 Ops/sec
DateTimeFormat 10000	75 Ops/sec
toLocaleString 10000	3 Ops/sec

DateTimeFormat vs toLocaleString2 (version: 1)

Comparing performance of: `DateTimeFormat single vs toLocaleString single vs DateTimeFormat 100 vs toLocaleString 100 vs DateTimeFormat 10000 vs toLocaleString 10000`

Created: one year ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

DateTimeFormat single

toLocaleString single

DateTimeFormat 100

toLocaleString 100

DateTimeFormat 10000

toLocaleString 10000

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

DateTimeFormat vs toLocaleString2 (version: 1)

Comparing performance of: DateTimeFormat single vs toLocaleString single vs DateTimeFormat 100 vs toLocaleString 100 vs DateTimeFormat 10000 vs toLocaleString 10000

Created: one year ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

DateTimeFormat single

toLocaleString single

DateTimeFormat 100

toLocaleString 100

DateTimeFormat 10000

toLocaleString 10000

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Related benchmarks

Comparing performance of: `DateTimeFormat single vs toLocaleString single vs DateTimeFormat 100 vs toLocaleString 100 vs DateTimeFormat 10000 vs toLocaleString 10000`