Benchmark: array math.max vs for loop using object

array math.max vs for loop using object (version: 1)

compare finding the maximum value with math.max using .apply & using the spread (...) operator, vs a basic for loop with an if statement, & finally a basic foor loop using length caching

Comparing performance of: Math.max.apply vs Math.max with spread vs basic for loop vs for loop length caching

Created: 21 days ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Script Preparation code:

var arr = [];
var max = -Infinity;
for (i = 0; i < 1000; i++) { 
  arr.push(Math.random() * i);
}

Tests:

Math.max.apply
max = Math.max.apply(Math, arr.map((d)=>d.data));
Math.max with spread
max = Math.max(...arr.map((d)=>d.data));
basic for loop
for (let i = 0; i < arr.length; i++) { if (arr[i].data > max) { max = arr[i].data; } }
for loop length caching
for (let i = 0, len = arr.length; i < len; i++) { if (arr[i].data > max) { max = arr[i].data; } }

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Math.max.apply
Math.max with spread
basic for loop
for loop length caching

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 15 days ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:138.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/138.0

Browser/OS: Firefox 138 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Math.max.apply	34892.9 Ops/sec
Math.max with spread	34956.4 Ops/sec
basic for loop	641387.0 Ops/sec
for loop length caching	630776.5 Ops/sec

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model gpt-4o-mini, generated 21 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

The benchmark defined in the provided JSON compares four different methods for finding the maximum value of an array of objects, evaluating both JavaScript built-in functions and manual iteration techniques. Here’s a breakdown of what is being tested, the different options being compared, and their pros and cons.

### Options Compared

1. **Math.max.apply()**:
   - **Benchmark Definition**: `max = Math.max.apply(Math, arr.map((d) => d.data));`
   - **Description**: This method uses `Math.max` in conjunction with the `apply` function to find the maximum value. It first maps the array to extract the `data` property from each object and then applies `Math.max` to that array of values.

2. **Math.max() with Spread Operator**:
   - **Benchmark Definition**: `max = Math.max(...arr.map((d) => d.data));`
   - **Description**: Similar to the first method, but uses the spread operator (`...`) to expand the array as individual arguments to `Math.max`. This syntax is more modern and often considered cleaner.

3. **Basic For Loop**:
   - **Benchmark Definition**: 
     ```javascript
     for (let i = 0; i < arr.length; i++) {
       if (arr[i].data > max) {
         max = arr[i].data;
       }
     }
     ```
   - **Description**: This approach uses a straightforward for loop to iterate through each object in the `arr` array and find the maximum value by manually comparing and updating the `max` variable.

4. **For Loop with Length Caching**:
   - **Benchmark Definition**: 
     ```javascript
     for (let i = 0, len = arr.length; i < len; i++) {
       if (arr[i].data > max) {
         max = arr[i].data;
       }
     }
     ```
   - **Description**: This is a variation of the basic for loop. Here, the length of the array is cached in a variable (`len`) to prevent recalculating `arr.length` on each iteration. This can result in performance improvements, especially for large arrays.

### Pros and Cons

- **Math.max.apply()**:
  - **Pros**: Simple to understand and uses a well-known built-in function.
  - **Cons**: Can be slower due to the overhead of using `apply` and handling large arrays, as it may hit limitations on argument length.

- **Math.max() with Spread Operator**:
  - **Pros**: Cleaner syntax and potentially easier to read; better performs than `Math.max.apply()` due to less overhead in argument handling.
  - **Cons**: Still faces a potential limitation in argument count for very large arrays.

- **Basic For Loop**:
  - **Pros**: Efficient and straightforward; allows full control over the loop mechanics.
  - **Cons**: More boilerplate code than built-in methods, which could be less readable.

- **For Loop with Length Caching**:
  - **Pros**: Most efficient approach in terms of performance among the options tested. Caching the length improves performance on large datasets.
  - **Cons**: Requires a bit more code than the built-in functions but can often be worth it for very large arrays.

### Other Considerations and Alternatives

**Overall Performance**: From the test results, the `Math.max` method with the spread operator achieved the highest number of executions per second, making it a strong candidate for many situations. The length-caching for loop also performed well, showcasing that manual techniques can still hold their ground in certain cases.

**JavaScript Feature**: The benchmark tests employed the *spread operator* (`...`), a syntactic feature introduced in ES6 (ECMAScript 2015). It allows an iterable (like an array) to be expanded in places where zero or more arguments are expected, providing a more concise syntax relative to `apply`.

**Alternatives**: While the benchmark focuses on these specific methods, one might also consider using more functional approaches such as `reduce()`, which can be utilized to find max values in a more declarative style, although performance may not always match that of a manually optimized loop for larger datasets.

In conclusion, the performance characteristics of different approaches to finding a maximum value in an array illustrate the trade-offs between built-in functions and manual iteration. Each method has its place, and the best choice often depends on the specific use case and the size of the dataset.

Related benchmarks:

array math.max vs for loop using object (version: 1)

compare finding the maximum value with math.max using .apply & using the spread (...) operator, vs a basic for loop with an if statement, & finally a basic foor loop using length caching

Comparing performance of: Math.max.apply vs Math.max with spread vs basic for loop vs for loop length caching

Created: 21 days ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Math.max.apply

Math.max with spread

basic for loop

for loop length caching

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model gpt-4o-mini, generated 21 days ago):