Benchmark: Trig functions - MeasureThat.net

Script Preparation code:

var N = 1000000;
var x = new Float32Array(N);
var y = new Float32Array(N);
var theta = new Float32Array(N);

for (var i = 0; i < N; ++i) {
	x[i] = 100* Math.random();
	y[i] = 100* Math.random();
}
for (var i = 0; i < N; ++i) {
	theta[i] = 2 * Math.PI * Math.random();
}

Tests:

sin
var fn = Math.sin; for (var i = 0; i < N; ++i) { fn(theta[i]); }
cos
var fn = Math.cos; for (var i = 0; i < N; ++i) { fn(theta[i]); }
tan
var fn = Math.tan; for (var i = 0; i < N; ++i) { fn(theta[i]); }
asin
var fn = Math.asin; for (var i = 0; i < N; ++i) { fn(x[i]); }
acos
var fn = Math.acos; for (var i = 0; i < N; ++i) { fn(x[i]); }
atan
var fn = Math.atan; for (var i = 0; i < N; ++i) { fn(x[i]); }
atan2
var fn = Math.atan; for (var i = 0; i < N; ++i) { fn(x[i], y[i]); }

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 30 community runs

Desktop Results:

Firefox 16 runs

asin

2K/s

atan

2K/s

acos

2K/s

tan

2K/s

cos

2K/s

sin

2K/s

atan2

40/s

Fastest: asin (51.7x faster)

View exact numbers

✓ asin: 2,078 ops/sec
• atan: 2,067 ops/sec
• acos: 2,049 ops/sec
• tan: 2,024 ops/sec
• cos: 1,970 ops/sec
• sin: 1,945 ops/sec
• atan2: 40 ops/sec

Chrome 14 runs

sin

12/s

cos

12/s

acos

11/s

tan

11/s

atan

10/s

asin

10/s

atan2

7/s

Fastest: sin (1.7x faster)

View exact numbers

✓ sin: 12 ops/sec
• cos: 12 ops/sec
• acos: 11 ops/sec
• tan: 11 ops/sec
• atan: 10 ops/sec
• asin: 10 ops/sec
• atan2: 7 ops/sec

Results show median performance across all community submissions. Run this benchmark yourself to verify on your device.

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
sin
cos
tan
asin
acos
atan
atan2

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 2 months ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/605.1.15 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/26.5 Safari/605.1.15

Browser/OS: Safari 26 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

tan

4K/s

acos

4K/s

atan

4K/s

atan2

4K/s

cos

2K/s

asin

2K/s

sin

2K/s

View exact numbers

Test name	Executions per second
✓ tan	3,984 Ops/sec
acos	3,976 Ops/sec
atan	3,971 Ops/sec
atan2	3,962 Ops/sec
cos	1,991 Ops/sec
asin	1,991 Ops/sec
sin	1,988 Ops/sec

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one year ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's dive into the world of JavaScript trigonometric functions benchmarking.

The provided JSON represents a series of individual test cases that measure the performance of different built-in JavaScript trigonometric functions: `sin`, `cos`, `tan`, `asin`, `acos`, and `atan`. The tests are designed to compare the execution speed of these functions for various input values, including angles in radians.

Here's what's being tested:

* **Math.sin**, Math.cos, and Math.tan**: These functions take a single argument representing an angle in radians. The test generates random angles between 0 and 2π (radians) and measures the time it takes to compute their sine, cosine, or tangent values using these functions.
* **Math.asin**, Math.acos, and Math.atan**: These inverse trigonometric functions take a single argument representing a value between -1 and 1. The test generates random input values for these functions and measures the time it takes to compute their results.

Now, let's explore the different approaches being compared:

* **Single-argument vs. Two-argument `atan`**: The `atan` function with one argument returns the arctangent of a single value, while the version with two arguments returns the arctangent of a pair of values (x and y coordinates). The test compares their performance for both cases.
* **Inverse trigonometric functions vs. Trigonometric functions**: This comparison is straightforward, as it measures the speed of computing inverse trigonometric functions versus regular trigonometric functions.

Pros and cons of each approach:

* Using a single array to store input values (e.g., `theta`) can reduce memory allocation overhead and improve performance.
* Reusing the same array for both computation and storage can lead to better cache locality, which might result in faster execution times.
* The test case with `atan2` is much slower due to its complexity and the need to perform additional calculations.

Other considerations:

* **Library usage**: Some tests use libraries like Math.js or MathTron, but they are not explicitly mentioned in the provided JSON. If used, these libraries might affect the results.
* **Special JavaScript features or syntax**: The test does not utilize any special JavaScript features or syntax that would require additional explanation.

Alternatives to the current benchmarking approach:

* Using a different set of input values (e.g., fractional angles) to better represent real-world scenarios.
* Incorporating additional tests for other trigonometric functions, such as `atanh` or `acosh`.
* Comparing performance with different JavaScript engines or browsers.

Keep in mind that this is just an analysis based on the provided information. A deeper understanding of the specific requirements and goals of the benchmarking project would be necessary to provide more tailored advice.

Trig functions (version: 0) Benchmark.js

Which of the built-in trig functions are fastest? slowest?

Comparing performance of: `sin vs cos vs tan vs asin vs acos vs atan vs atan2`

Created: 9 years ago by: Registered User

Go to the latest result

sin

cos

tan

asin

acos

atan

atan2

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 30 community runs

Desktop Results:

Firefox 16 runs

Chrome 14 runs

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one year ago):

Trig functions (version: 0) Benchmark.js

Which of the built-in trig functions are fastest? slowest?

Comparing performance of: sin vs cos vs tan vs asin vs acos vs atan vs atan2

Created: 9 years ago by: Registered User

Go to the latest result

sin

cos

tan

asin

acos

atan

atan2

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 30 community runs

Desktop Results:

Firefox 16 runs

Chrome 14 runs

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one year ago):

Related benchmarks

Comparing performance of: `sin vs cos vs tan vs asin vs acos vs atan vs atan2`