Toggle navigation
MeasureThat
.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
Math.pow vs ** vs * test
(version: 1)
Comparing performance of:
pow vs **
Created:
one year ago
by:
Guest
Go to the latest result
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>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
pow
**
Fastest:
N/A
Slowest:
N/A
Latest run results:
Run details:
(Test run date:
6 months ago
)
User agent:
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:146.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/146.0
Browser/OS:
Firefox 146 on Windows
View result in a separate tab
Embed
Embed Benchmark Result
<iframe src="https://measurethat.net/Embed?id=623532" width="100%" height="500px"></iframe>
pow
1815.2M/s
**
1734.1M/s
View exact numbers
Test name
Executions per second
✓
pow
1,815,240,064 Ops/sec
**
1,734,123,520 Ops/sec
Autogenerated LLM Summary
(model
gpt-4o-mini
, generated one year ago):
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 *, square only
Math.pow(,2) vs **2 vs *
math pow 0 vs pow 2
math pow of 0 vs pow of 54
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?