Benchmark: Direct Array vs Typed Array vs Array

Tests:

new TypedArray
let arr = new Float32Array(1000000); arr[0] = Math.random(); for (let i = 0; i < 1000000; i++) { arr[i] = arr[i - 1]; }
new Array
let arr = new Array(1000000); arr[0] = Math.random(); for (let i = 0; i < 1000000; i++) { arr[i] = arr[i - 1]; }
Direct Array
let arr = []; arr[0] = Math.random(); for (let i = 0; i < 1000000; i++) { arr[i] = arr[i - 1]; }

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
new TypedArray
new Array
Direct Array

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 3 months ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:147.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/147.0

Browser/OS: Firefox 147 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
new TypedArray	231.6 Ops/sec
new Array	103.8 Ops/sec
Direct Array	103.9 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the provided benchmark and its components.

**Benchmark Purpose:**
The benchmark compares the performance of three different array types in JavaScript:

1. **Direct Array**: A standard JavaScript array, created using the `[]` syntax or the `Array()` constructor.
2. **Typed Array**: A specialized array type that provides enhanced performance for specific data types, such as numbers (Float32Array), integers (Int32Array), and others. Typed arrays are created using constructors like `Float32Array()`, `Int32Array()`, etc.

**Options Compared:**

* **Direct Array vs Typed Array**: The benchmark compares the performance of direct arrays versus typed arrays for a specific data type, in this case, Float32Array.
	+ Pros:
		- Easy to use and understand.
		- Familiar syntax for most developers.
	+ Cons:
		- May not be optimized for specific data types, resulting in slower performance.
* **Direct Array vs Array**: The benchmark also compares the performance of direct arrays versus standard JavaScript arrays (created using `[]` syntax or `Array()` constructor).
	+ Pros:
		- Still a familiar syntax for most developers.
	+ Cons:
		- May not be optimized for specific data types, resulting in slower performance compared to typed arrays.

**Library and Purpose:**
In the benchmark, a library is used to create and manipulate typed arrays. Specifically:

* `Float32Array`: A typed array that provides optimized storage and manipulation of 32-bit floating-point numbers.

The purpose of using typed arrays is to take advantage of specialized memory layouts and operations that are not available in standard JavaScript arrays, resulting in improved performance for certain use cases.

**Special JS Feature/Syntax:**
There is no explicit special feature or syntax used in the benchmark. However, it's worth noting that some modern JavaScript engines, like WebAssembly, may provide additional features or optimizations that could impact performance.

**Alternatives:**

1. **NativeArray**: A typed array from the WebAssembly (WASM) specification, which provides a more efficient and portable alternative to traditional typed arrays.
2. **NativeFloat32Array**, **NativeInt32Array**, etc.: Other specialized typed arrays for specific data types, which might be used in certain performance-critical applications.

Keep in mind that these alternatives are still subject to the limitations of their respective standards and may not offer significant advantages over traditional typed arrays in all use cases.

Related benchmarks:

Direct Array vs Typed Array vs Array (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: new TypedArray vs new Array vs Direct Array

Created: 5 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

new TypedArray

new Array

Direct Array

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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