Benchmark: Math.pow vs ** vs * test

Tests:

pow
var tmp = Math.pow(-2 * 2 + 2, 3);
**
var tmp = (-2 * 2 + 2) ** 21;

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
pow
**

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/134.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 134 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
pow	166552288.0 Ops/sec
**	178438144.0 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

In this benchmark, the performance of three different methods to perform exponentiation (raising a number to a power) in JavaScript is evaluated: `Math.pow`, the exponentiation operator (`**`), and the multiplication operator (`*`). However, in the provided tests, it compares only `Math.pow` and the `**` operator.

### Description of Options Compared:
1. **Math.pow**: This is a built-in JavaScript function that takes two arguments: a base and an exponent, returning the base raised to the exponent's power. In the provided benchmark, it's used as `Math.pow(-2 * 2 + 2, 3)` which computes `(-2 * 2 + 2)` raised to the power of `3` (which results in `-6` raised to the power of `3`).

- **Pros**:
     - It is a widely recognized and traditional method for exponentiation in many programming languages.
     - Generally clear to anyone familiar with programming.

- **Cons**:
     - It can be slower than other methods due to function call overhead.
     - Reads slightly longer than using an operator.

2. **Exponentiation Operator (`**`)**: This is a relatively newer addition to the JavaScript syntax (introduced in ECMAScript 2016) allowing for a more concise representation of exponentiation. In the benchmark, it compares `(-2 * 2 + 2) ** 21`, calculating the same base but raising it to `21`.

- **Pros**:
     - More concise and arguably more readable as it resembles mathematical notation.
     - Potentially more efficient in performance compared to `Math.pow`, as indicated by the benchmark result.

- **Cons**:
     - It may not be as well known to beginners who are used to older JS standards.
     - Some environments may not support this operator if they do not implement ES2016 or later.

### Benchmark Results Overview:
From the benchmark result, the `**` operator has been found to be slightly faster than `Math.pow`, with executions per second being 178,438,144 for the `**` operator and 166,552,288 for `Math.pow`. This indicates that the modern exponentiation operator (`**`) may provide better performance overall in the tested environment (Chrome 134 on macOS).

### Other Considerations:
- **Compatibility**: While `Math.pow` is universally supported across all JavaScript environments, the `**` operator requires support for ES2016, which might not be available in older browsers.
- **Use Cases**: For scientific calculations or applications involving complex arithmetic, using a method that optimizes performance could be crucial.

### Alternatives:
In cases where exponentiation is necessary, the main alternatives to these two methods are:
1. Using repeated multiplication: This can only be practically implemented manually and is not efficient, but may be useful for small, fixed powers.
2. Using libraries like **Math.js** or **Lodash**, which provide utility functions for mathematical operations including exponentiation. 
   - **Math.js** is a comprehensive math library that offers functionality for complex numbers, matrices, and other mathematical functions beyond simple exponentiation.

Overall, while both `Math.pow` and the `**` operator can be used effectively for exponentiation in JavaScript, the newer `**` operator is advantageous for performance and brevity, assuming compatible environments.

Related benchmarks:

Math.pow vs ** vs * test (version: 1)

Comparing performance of: pow vs **

Created: one month ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

pow

**

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):