Toggle navigation
MeasureThat
.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
Math pow and double asterix
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
56**2 vs Math.pow(56, 2);
Created:
6 years ago
by:
Guest
Go to the latest result
Script Preparation code:
Math.pow(56, 2);
Tests:
56**2
56**2
Math.pow(56, 2);
Math.pow(56, 2);
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
56**2
Math.pow(56, 2);
Fastest:
N/A
Slowest:
N/A
Latest run results:
Run details:
(Test run date:
2 months ago
)
User agent:
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/142.0.0.0 Safari/537.36
Browser/OS:
Chrome 142 on Linux
View result in a separate tab
Embed
Embed Benchmark Result
<iframe src="https://measurethat.net/Embed?id=629455" width="100%" height="500px"></iframe>
Math.pow(56, 2);
226.3M/s
56**2
211.7M/s
View exact numbers
Test name
Executions per second
✓
Math.pow(56, 2);
226,314,784 Ops/sec
56**2
211,691,216 Ops/sec
Autogenerated LLM Summary
(model
llama3.2:3b
, generated one year ago):
Let's break down the provided benchmark definition and test cases. **Benchmark Definition JSON** The provided JSON represents a single benchmark with the following properties: * `Name`: The name of the benchmark, which is "Math pow and double asterix". * `Description`: An empty string indicating no description for this benchmark. * `Script Preparation Code`: A JavaScript statement that initializes a variable `x` to 56 using the exponentiation operator (**) instead of the traditional `Math.pow()` function. This code is executed before running the actual test. * `Html Preparation Code`: An empty string, which suggests that no HTML-related setup or cleanup is required for this benchmark. **Individual Test Cases** The provided JSON also includes two individual test cases: * The first test case uses a simple exponentiation operator (`56**2`) and has the same name as the test case. * The second test case uses the `Math.pow()` function with arguments 56 and 2, and has the same name as the test case. Now, let's analyze the options being compared: 1. **Exponentiation Operator (**) vs. `Math.pow()`**: Both operators are used to calculate the power of a number. However, there is a subtle difference in their implementation: * The exponentiation operator (`**`) uses a specialized CPU instruction (e.g., SSE/AVX instructions on x86 CPUs) that calculates powers much faster than the traditional `Math.pow()` function. * `Math.pow()`, on the other hand, uses a slower but more general-purpose algorithm to calculate powers. * Pros of using the exponentiation operator: Faster performance, especially for large exponents. Cons: Requires specialized CPU instructions and may not work correctly on all platforms or browsers. * Pros of using `Math.pow()` : More widely supported, easier to understand and implement, and works correctly on most platforms and browsers. Cons: Slower performance compared to the exponentiation operator. 2. **Inline Exponentiation (**) vs. `Math.pow()`**: In both cases, the operator is used to calculate powers. However, inline exponentiation (`56**2`) is optimized for performance by using a specialized CPU instruction, while `Math.pow(56, 2)` uses a slower but more general-purpose algorithm. Considerations: * When writing benchmarks, it's essential to consider the specific use case and requirements. If speed is critical, using inline exponentiation or other optimizations might be beneficial. * However, if code readability and maintainability are more important than performance, using `Math.pow()` might be a better choice. * Additionally, when running benchmarks across multiple platforms and browsers, it's crucial to ensure that the optimized code works correctly and consistently. **Library and Special JS Features** In this benchmark, no libraries or special JavaScript features are used. The test cases only rely on basic JavaScript syntax. **Alternatives** Other alternatives for calculating powers in JavaScript include: * `**` with a multiplier (e.g., `56 * 56`) * `Math.pow()` with arguments swapped (e.g., `Math.pow(2, 4)`)
Related benchmarks
math pow vs multiply (with few extra variants)
Leetcode Pow vs Math.pow syntax
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?