Benchmark: array vs int32Array

Script Preparation code:

function getRandomInt(max) {
  return Math.floor(Math.random() * Math.floor(max));
}
var a = [...Array(10000)].map(_ => Math.random(1000000));
var ta = (new Int32Array(10000)).map(_ => Math.random(1000000));

Tests:

array reverse
a.reverse();
typedArray reverse
ta.reverse();
array i/o
for (let i = 0; i < 10000; ++i) a[i] = a[i] + 1;
typedArray i/o
for (let i = 0; i < 10000; ++i) ta[i] = ta[i] + 1;

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 28 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 18 runs

typedArray reverse

441K/s

array reverse

146K/s

array i/o

54K/s

typedArray i/o

42K/s

Fastest: typedArray reverse (10.4x faster)

View exact numbers

✓ typedArray reverse: 440,961 ops/sec
• array reverse: 146,206 ops/sec
• array i/o: 53,606 ops/sec
• typedArray i/o: 42,226 ops/sec

Firefox 10 runs

typedArray reverse

207K/s

typedArray i/o

147K/s

array reverse

118K/s

array i/o

78K/s

Fastest: typedArray reverse (2.7x faster)

View exact numbers

✓ typedArray reverse: 206,551 ops/sec
• typedArray i/o: 147,471 ops/sec
• array reverse: 117,900 ops/sec
• array i/o: 77,717 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
array reverse
typedArray reverse
array i/o
typedArray i/o

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: yesterday)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/150.0.0.0 Safari/537.36 Edg/150.0.0.0

Browser/OS: Chrome 150 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

typedArray reverse

444K/s

array reverse

147K/s

array i/o

56K/s

typedArray i/o

51K/s

View exact numbers

Test name	Executions per second
✓ typedArray reverse	444,057 Ops/sec
array reverse	146,727 Ops/sec
array i/o	55,790 Ops/sec
typedArray i/o	50,691 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

**What is being tested?**

On MeasureThat.net, the provided JSON represents a JavaScript microbenchmarking test case. The benchmark tests two approaches to handling arrays and typed arrays:

1. **Arrays**: A standard JavaScript array (`a`) with 10,000 elements is created using `Array(10000)`. This array undergoes various operations:
	* Reversal: `a.reverse()`
	* Input/Output (I/O): Each element is incremented by 1 (`a[i] = a[i] + 1`)
2. **Typed Arrays**: An `Int32Array` (`ta`) with 10,000 elements is created using `new Int32Array(10000)`. This typed array also undergoes the same operations as the standard array.

**Options compared**

The benchmark compares two options:

1. **Standard JavaScript Array (a)**: Uses the built-in JavaScript array data structure.
2. **Typed Array (`ta`)**: Uses a specialized data structure optimized for numerical computations, `Int32Array`.

**Pros and Cons of each approach**

1. **Standard JavaScript Array (a)**:
	* Pros:
		+ Wide browser support
		+ Easy to implement and use
	* Cons:
		+ Performance may suffer compared to typed arrays for numerical computations
2. **Typed Array (`ta`)**:
	* Pros:
		+ Optimized performance for numerical computations
		+ May be faster than standard JavaScript arrays for these operations
	* Cons:
		+ Less browser support compared to standard JavaScript arrays
		+ May require more code to set up and use

**Library and purpose**

The `Int32Array` is a typed array data structure provided by the ECMAScript standard. It is designed to store 32-bit integers in an efficient manner, which makes it suitable for numerical computations.

**Special JS feature or syntax**

None mentioned in this specific benchmark case.

**Other alternatives**

If you need to handle large arrays or perform complex numerical computations, other options might include:

1. **WebAssembly**: A binary format that allows running languages like C or Rust on web browsers.
2. **Native ArrayBuffers**: Used in some libraries like Three.js for handling large amounts of 3D data.

However, these alternatives are typically more complex to set up and use compared to standard JavaScript arrays and typed arrays.

array vs int32Array (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: `array reverse vs typedArray reverse vs array i/o vs typedArray i/o`

Created: 6 years ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

array reverse

typedArray reverse

array i/o

typedArray i/o

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 28 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 18 runs

Firefox 10 runs

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

array vs int32Array (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: array reverse vs typedArray reverse vs array i/o vs typedArray i/o

Created: 6 years ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

array reverse

typedArray reverse

array i/o

typedArray i/o

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 28 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 18 runs

Firefox 10 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: `array reverse vs typedArray reverse vs array i/o vs typedArray i/o`