.startsWith() vs. RegExp for short strings and short prefixes (version: 1)

Comparing performance of: .startsWith() vs RegExp

Created: one year ago by: Registered User
Go to the latest result
Script Preparation code:
Tests:

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 5 community runs

Desktop Results:
Chrome 5 runs
.startsWith()
20K/s
RegExp
6K/s

Fastest: .startsWith() (3.3x faster)

View exact numbers
  • ✓ .startsWith(): 19,911 ops/sec
  • • RegExp: 6,035 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
    .startsWith()
    RegExp

    Fastest: N/A

    Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:
Run details: (Test run date: 9 months ago)
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/141.0.0.0 Safari/537.36 Edg/141.0.0.0
Chrome 141 on Windows
View result in a separate tab
.startsWith()
26K/s
RegExp
9K/s
View exact numbers
Test name Executions per second
✓ .startsWith() 26,135 Ops/sec
RegExp 8,634 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks