Benchmark: set.has vs. array.includes vs object lookup (larger array)

Script Preparation code:

var a = new Array(10000).fill(null).map((_, i) => i).sort(() => Math.random() - 0.5)
var b = new Set(a)
var c = a.reduce((a, b) => ({ ...a, b: true }), {})

Tests:

includes
return a.includes(1)
lookup
return b.has(1)
object key
return c[1]
array find
return a.find(n => n === 100)

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
includes
lookup
object key
array find

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/133.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 133 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
includes	3715081.8 Ops/sec
lookup	180131648.0 Ops/sec
object key	176005232.0 Ops/sec
array find	217228.8 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

set.has vs. array.includes (big)
set.has vs. array.includes (10000 items)
set.has vs. array.includes at scale
set.has vs. array.includes (large: 100)
set.has vs. array.includes on 25 000 items
set.has vs. array.includes 10k el
set.has vs. array.includes (100000)
set.has vs. array.includes for 1000 elements
array includes vs object key lookup vs Set.has

set.has vs. array.includes vs object lookup (larger array) (version: 1)

Comparing performance of: includes vs lookup vs object key vs array find

Created: one year ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

includes

lookup

object key

array find

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A