Benchmark: Check JSON.stringify with different object's complexity

Tests:

Empty object
const emptyObj = {}; JSON.stringify(emptyObj)
Small object
const smallObj = { abcde: 'efghi', efghi: 'jklmn', opqrst: 'uvwxyz' } JSON.stringify(smallObj)

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Empty object
Small object

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 11 months ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/137.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 137 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Empty object	16611135.0 Ops/sec
Small object	6070930.5 Ops/sec

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model gpt-4o-mini, generated 11 months ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

The benchmark provided evaluates the performance of the JavaScript `JSON.stringify` method with different levels of object complexity. This method is used to convert JavaScript objects into JSON strings, which can be useful for data interchange, storage, or transmission purposes.

### Options Compared
The benchmark consists of two test cases:

1. **Empty Object**
   - **Test Case**: `const emptyObj = {}; JSON.stringify(emptyObj);`
   - **Description**: Tests the performance of `JSON.stringify` when called on an empty object.

2. **Small Object**
   - **Test Case**: 
   ```javascript
   const smallObj = {
       abcde: 'efghi',
       efghi: 'jklmn',
       opqrst: 'uvwxyz'
   };
   JSON.stringify(smallObj);
   ```
   - **Description**: Tests the performance of `JSON.stringify` when called on a small object containing three key-value pairs.

### Pros/Cons of Different Approaches
1. **Empty Object**:
   - **Pros**: Fastest possible execution time since there are no properties to serialize, making it a baseline for performance measurement.
   - **Cons**: Does not give clues about how `JSON.stringify` scales with complexity or size, offering limited insights into performance for more complex objects.

2. **Small Object**:
   - **Pros**: Provides insight into how serialization performance changes with the addition of properties in an object. It simulates a simple but structured data scenario.
   - **Cons**: Still relatively small, and does not represent larger or nested objects which may reveal more significant performance differences.

### Considerations
- **Performance Metrics**: The benchmark measures "Executions Per Second" (EPS), which indicates how many times `JSON.stringify` can convert the defined object in a second. Higher EPS implies better performance.
- **Browser and Environment**: The tests are conducted in Chrome (version 137) on a Windows desktop. Results can vary significantly across different browsers and environments, making cross-browser compatibility a relevant consideration.

### Alternatives
1. **Other Object Types**: Additional benchmark cases could involve larger objects, nested objects (objects within objects), and arrays, to examine the performance of `JSON.stringify` comprehensively.
2. **Other Libraries**: While this benchmark specifically focuses on the built-in `JSON.stringify`, there are libraries like [JSON5](https://json5.org/) that extend the functionality of JSON with comments, trailing commas, and more. This could be worth testing if the need arises.
3. **Alternative Serialization Methods**: In addition to `JSON.stringify`, methods like serialization with [BSON](https://bsonspec.org/) (Binary JSON) could be explored, especially in scenarios where performance and data structure matters significantly.

### Conclusion
This benchmark effectively evaluates the performance of the `JSON.stringify` method under minimal object complexity, providing a foundation for understanding its execution speed. Further benchmarks with varied object complexities would broaden the understanding of performance and efficiency in various real-world applications.

Related benchmarks:

Check JSON.stringify with different object's complexity (version: 1)

Comparing performance of: Empty object vs Small object

Created: 11 months ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

Empty object

Small object

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model gpt-4o-mini, generated 11 months ago):