Benchmark: DataView vs TypedArray Float64 fixed

Script Preparation code:

var buffer1 = new ArrayBuffer(1024 * Float64Array.BYTES_PER_ELEMENT);
var array = new Float64Array(buffer1);
var buffer2 = new ArrayBuffer(1024 * Float64Array.BYTES_PER_ELEMENT);
var view = new DataView(buffer2);

Tests:

array[i] = i;
for (let i = 0; i < 1024; i += 1) { if (i === 0) { array[i] = 1; } else { array[i] = array[i-1] + i;; } }
view.setFloat64(i, i)
for (let i = 0; i < 1024; i += 8) { if (i === 0) { view.setFloat64(i, 1); } else { view.setFloat64(i, view.getFloat64(i - 1) + i); } }
array[i] = i; 2
for (let i = 0; i < 1024; i += 1) { if (i === 0) { array[i] = 1; } else { array[i] = array[i-1] + i; } }
view.setFloat64(i, i) 2
for (let i = 0; i < 1024; i += 8) { if (i === 0) { view.setFloat64(i, 1); } else { view.setFloat64(i, view.getFloat64(i - 1) + i); } }

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
array[i] = i;
view.setFloat64(i, i)
array[i] = i; 2
view.setFloat64(i, i) 2

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/134.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 134 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
array[i] = i;	370783.3 Ops/sec
view.setFloat64(i, i)	584219.1 Ops/sec
array[i] = i; 2	373710.1 Ops/sec
view.setFloat64(i, i) 2	590864.1 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

The benchmark named **"DataView vs TypedArray Float64 fixed"** compares two approaches to handling binary data in JavaScript: **Typed Arrays** (specifically `Float64Array`) and **DataView**. Both approaches utilize binary buffers created using `ArrayBuffer`, but they offer different methods for accessing and manipulating the numerical data stored in these buffers.

### Options Compared

1. **Typed Array (Float64Array)**:
   - **Test Case**: 
     ```javascript
     for (let i = 0; i < 1024; i += 1) {
       if (i === 0) {
         array[i] = 1;
       } else {
         array[i] = array[i-1] + i; 
       }
     }
     ```
   - **Pros**:
     - **Simple API**: Provides a straightforward way to handle data. You can access elements as if you were working with a simple array.
     - **Type-Specific**: Automatically handles the conversion of numbers to and from 64-bit floating point format.
     - **Performance**: In many cases, accessing data through Typed Arrays can be faster due to optimized memory handling and less overhead than using an object-based approach.

- **Cons**:
     - Fixed data type: You cannot mix data types in a single Typed Array; it only handles one specific type (e.g., `Float64Array` for 64-bit floats).

2. **DataView**:
   - **Test Case**: 
     ```javascript
     for (let i = 0; i < 1024; i += 8) {
       if (i === 0) {
         view.setFloat64(i, 1);
       } else {
         view.setFloat64(i, view.getFloat64(i - 8) + i);
       }
     }
     ```
   - **Pros**:
     - **Flexibility**: Allows for reading and writing of multiple types (e.g., `Int32`, `Float64`, etc.) in the same buffer. This is useful if different types of data are needed.
     - **Control over Endianness**: Offers control over the byte order (endianness) when reading from or writing to the buffer, which can be useful in certain scenarios like dealing with binary data across different platforms.

- **Cons**:
     - **Complex API**: The API is more complex compared to Typed Arrays, requiring additional method calls to read and write data.
     - Can be slower when manipulating types frequently due to additional function calls required for reading and writing.

### Benchmark Results Summary

From the benchmark results, we see the following:

- The highest performance was obtained with the `view.setFloat64(i, i) 2` test case, achieving around **546,298.625 executions per second**.
- The second test case (`view.setFloat64(i, i)`) also performed well, just slightly less at about **535,164.0625 executions per second**.
- In contrast, the Typed Array approach returned lower execution rates, with around **302,037.71875 executions per second** for both cases.

### Other Considerations

- **Memory Management**: Both `Float64Array` and `DataView` depend on `ArrayBuffer`, which allows for efficient binary data storage. However, Typed Arrays provide better ease of use with built-in methods that can minimize overhead.
- **Performance**: In high-performance scenarios where you may need to handle large datasets or perform many operations swiftly, `DataView` appears to perform better in this benchmark with appropriate use of memory addresses and data manipulation.
- **Use Case Suitability**: When deciding between these options, consider the nature of your data and operations. If the data type is homogenous and fixed (e.g., only 64-bit floats), prefer Typed Arrays for their simplicity and performance. If different data types need to coexist in the same buffer or byte-ordering considerations are paramount, opt for DataView.

### Alternative Approaches

- **Array**: Standard JavaScript arrays can serve as a simple alternative when type-specific data handling is not critical. However, they lack the performance benefits and memory efficiency inherent in Typed Arrays or DataViews.
- **WebAssembly (Wasm)**: For performance-critical applications, compiling code to Wasm can provide further optimization but requires different tooling and knowledge.
- **Other Typed Arrays & DataViews**: Depending on the needs (i.e., signed integers, unsigned integers), other Typed Arrays (like `Int32Array`, `Uint8Array`) or combinations of `DataViews` can also be utilized.

Overall, this benchmark provides insights into choosing between Typed Arrays and DataView based on performance, ease of use, and flexibility requirements in JavaScript applications.

Related benchmarks:

DataView vs TypedArray Float64 fixed (version: 1)

Comparing performance of: array[i] = i; vs view.setFloat64(i, i) vs array[i] = i; 2 vs view.setFloat64(i, i) 2

Created: one month ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

array[i] = i;

view.setFloat64(i, i)

array[i] = i; 2

view.setFloat64(i, i) 2

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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