Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
Get and Put image data on an opaque canvas
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of: get and set vs get, paint, and set
Comparing performance of:
get and set vs get, paint, and set
Created:
6 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
HTML Preparation code:
<canvas id='drawcan' width='512' height='512'></canvas>
Script Preparation code:
var drawCon = document.getElementById('drawcan').getContext('2d',{ alpha: false});
Tests:
get and set
var imageData = drawCon.getImageData(0,0,512,512); drawCon.putImageData(imageData,0,0);
get, paint, and set
var imageData = drawCon.getImageData(0,0,512,512); for (var i = 0; i < 200; i++) { for (var j = 0; j < 200; j++) { imageData[i*512+j] = 0xff00ff; } } drawCon.putImageData(imageData,0,0);
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
get and set
get, paint, and set
Fastest:
N/A
Slowest:
N/A
Latest run results:
No previous run results
This benchmark does not have any results yet. Be the first one
to run it!
Autogenerated LLM Summary
(model
llama3.2:3b
, generated one year ago):
Let's break down the benchmark being tested. **Benchmark Definition** The benchmark is designed to compare the performance of three different approaches for setting image data on an opaque canvas: 1. **get and set**: This approach involves retrieving the image data using `getImageData()` and then immediately updating it with `putImageData()`. 2. **get, paint, and set**: This approach involves painting a red square on the canvas using `fillRect()` or similar, which effectively modifies the underlying pixel data. **Options Compared** The two main options being compared are: * **get and set**: This approach uses `getImageData()` to retrieve the image data, which can be slow since it requires creating a new DOM object. * **get, paint, and set**: This approach paints directly on the canvas using `fillRect()`, which is likely faster since it doesn't require retrieving the entire image data. **Pros and Cons** **Get and Set:** Pros: * Easy to understand and implement * Can be useful for debugging or testing specific parts of the code Cons: * Slower due to the overhead of creating a new DOM object **Get, Paint, and Set:** Pros: * Faster since it doesn't require retrieving the entire image data * More efficient use of resources Cons: * May be more difficult to understand and implement for complex cases * Can lead to unexpected behavior if not used carefully (e.g., changing pixel values without updating the DOM) **Library Usage** In this benchmark, there is no explicit library usage. However, it's worth noting that `getContext()` is used to create a 2D drawing context on the canvas. **Special JS Features/Syntax** There are no special JavaScript features or syntax being tested in this benchmark. The code is written in vanilla JavaScript and doesn't rely on any advanced features like async/await, Promises, or modern ES6+ syntax. **Other Alternatives** For a similar benchmark, you might consider using other approaches that compare the performance of different image manipulation techniques, such as: * Using a GPU-accelerated canvas library (e.g., WebGL) to set image data * Comparing the performance of different image formats or compression algorithms * Measuring the performance of different rendering engines (e.g., WebKit vs. Blink) * Testing the impact of different screen resolutions, aspect ratios, or display densities on benchmark performance
Related benchmarks:
Image vs ImageBitmap vs canvas with context2d
Image vs canvas with 2d
Image vs canvas with webgl2d
RGB vs RGBa vs HSL vs Hex using Canvas (alpha: false)
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?